# Drives ??



## Clark Niemitalo

Ok so i fumble around on here from time to time..And now after some deep reading I would like personal defiinitions of drives.And if they are a layered drives.

Clark Niemitalo


----------



## will fernandez

here is how I see drives


hunt=search for prey with all of the the dogs tools

Prey=desire to chase and fill its mouth with prey item

Fight=desire to dominate or kill prey 

defense=trying to cause the threat to retreat through display or biting


----------



## Brian Anderson

what Will said and they either have it or not. You CANNOT put or will it into them if its not there naturally.


----------



## Clark Niemitalo

Is there a possibilityof combining any of these.This is what i see in training is complicating drives when one is the same as another.. will go into my view after we get more..


----------



## Clark Niemitalo

True they have it or not, I am talking about dogs with drive not manufactoring them..


----------



## Keith Jenkins

I think if you speak about prey drive in the strictest sense you would pretty much combine that hunt/prey/fight as they all interact with one another, they depend to varying degrees on each other. 

Defense gets it's own little island. 

I agree you can't instill something that was never actually there but you can develope it or go to the other end of the spectrum and completely screw it up. Pretty much everytime we train a dog, whatever the phase, we are to some effect manufacturing what we want to see.


----------



## will fernandez

Well...if the prey item cannot be killed or dominated. the dog will goto into defense to preserve himself.

Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Or the dog will die trying to dominate anyway.


----------



## will fernandez

Yes Don that is the type of heart we would like to see.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Don Turnipseed said:


> Or the dog will die trying to dominate anyway.


in 2% of dogs if your lucky


----------



## Don Turnipseed

will fernandez said:


> Yes Don that is the type of heart we would like to see.


Good term there Will. I knew exactly what heart meant.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Clark Niemitalo said:


> Ok so i fumble around on here from time to time..And now after some deep reading I would like personal defiinitions of drives.And if they are a layered drives.
> 
> Clark Niemitalo


 I think that for it to be a drive it has to have a goal. This would leave out defense as a drive. No dog would seek out an opportunity to go into defense.

I'm not sure what you mean by layered. But if you mean combined drives....yes they are layered.


----------



## Clark Niemitalo

Chris i was hoping you would post on here. But we walk the same path..But i would like to see if people understand the layers of say prey drive??


----------



## Clark Niemitalo

Oh and my defination of drive is determination..The main source is prey the others are layers.


----------



## Clark Niemitalo

Layers?? Prey drive, layers of this hunt fight aggression. To start with.


----------



## Wayne Dodge

Clark,

It is obvious that you have your own opinion on this, your own thoughts that run against the normal flow of things. I would suggest that you just go ahead and write your theories out and allow the world to read, consider and judge your take. If you are truly looking to share knowledge then this seems the best option if not then why leave layers of questions that revolve around your desire to argue your point. 

Just my take though…


----------



## Joby Becker

Christopher Smith said:


> I think that for it to be a drive it has to have a goal. This would leave out defense as a drive. No dog would seek out an opportunity to go into defense.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by layered. But if you mean combined drives....yes they are layered.


you dont think defense is a drive because a dog will not seek out an opportunity to go into defense? and also say a drive has to have a goal...

although I am sure you have your reasons, and hopefully will share them, but on the surface I do not agree...

Aside from defensive behaviors that may overlap during bitework (training, or competing), I think there is a definitive goal for what most people would consider defense drive, and even though a dog may or may not seek out an opportunity use it, it may find itself in a position where it will use it, and it does serve a couple of functions.

Defense of Territory.
Defense of family.
Defense of "prey" or other resources..food, toys, etc...
and Defense of the dog itself.

Most people agree defense drive is rooted in worry or fear, 
I think it is used to drive off what it perceives ad a threat to any of the above.

I am hoping to see your view on it..My mind is open...


----------



## Christopher Smith

Joby, let me give this another shot. I'm using my phone for these post so things don't always come out right when I'm trying to be brief. 


I think that defense is an instinct. It's something that all dogs have. All dogs will fight, flight or freeze, but they want the encounter to end as quickly as possible. The dog does not find it pleasurable; it's a negative. 


Drives are something different. It is something the dog does because it makes him feel good when he goes into that drive state. Getting into that drive state is the goal. So dogs chase a rag because it makes them feel good. They breed a bitch because it feels good. The dog finds it pleasurable; it's a positive.


If this kicks you into disagreement drive.....


----------



## Clark Niemitalo

Drives a goal or purpose, to hunt to chase to gaurd so on. Are linked back to one Natural Drive IMO. Prey drive..I agree with Chris defence is an instinct to protect, with tihis it is brought out under threat or pressure, it shows it self..A drive is visible in the dogs out right manner.Defence can also come out in the out right manner, But is it true, or nerve based fear..Which is that a good or bad quality.

As far as theories i believe that we have methods not guesses.educated or not..I have methods in training that work for me there are differences due to the dog but i rarely guess.

My question is do we seperate drives and complicate what we do when building the source drive would bring out the layers or combination.

Clark Niemitalo


----------



## will fernandez

Working the source first then separating when you must fine tune for specific training seems to be how I train now.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Wayne Dodge said:


> Clark,
> 
> It is obvious that you have your own opinion on this, your own thoughts that run against the normal flow of things. I would suggest that you just go ahead and write your theories out and allow the world to read, consider and judge your take. If you are truly looking to share knowledge then this seems the best option if not then why leave layers of questions that revolve around your desire to argue your point.
> 
> Just my take though…


I agree Wayne and will add my own blather for what its worth. 

This is being made WAYYY to convoluted. Its not a difficult concept Clark. The dog will either move forward and do what you want or not. Its not any more complicated than that. Keep in mind I am a simple country boy but I have this part figured out I am pretty sure ;-)


----------



## Clark Niemitalo

I am with ya Wiil and Brian you do have to seperate or combine i call it layers..I Just see on here how they seperate a drive to be something totally different.When it is actually prey or what not.

When I say a dog has high prey drive he will also have hunt fight and aggression.

And yes I am a sport trainer this has been told to me buy many people when haveing this discussion..But my Sch dogs work on a suit and do no equiptment work..I train the dog and mold Sch into it..


----------



## Clark Niemitalo

Wayne, I am not trying to argue this We all have our own ways..I am just curious how people call drives and there definition..I have explained my side in short term but i am still waiting for more from others. And thank you to those who have..

Also if you would like to judge my ways dont do it by words on the forum please come and train, work the dogs i work..Then we can have open discussion.

I am open to evolution of training..


----------



## Jim Engel

*Standard question, standard answer.*

This sort of thing comes up over and over:

http://www.angelplace.net/dog/Drives.htm


----------



## Christopher Smith

Clark Niemitalo said:


> Also if you would like to judge my ways dont do it by words on the forum please come and train, work the dogs i work..Then we can have open discussion.


=D>


----------



## Don Turnipseed

*Re: Standard question, standard answer.*



Jim Engel said:


> This sort of thing comes up over and over:
> 
> http://www.angelplace.net/dog/Drives.htm


Excellent article Jim. Timely also. :grin:


----------



## Peter Cho

Drive is just a desire. 
Desire to chase and play and bite ....prey
Desire to self preserve.....by fighting back in response or running away,....defense 
Desire to hunt and kill prey object......prey drive transisioning to prey aggression
Most dog training books will tell u above.

To be honest, knowing these drives and how u define it is not very useful. Knowing how to manipulate stimulus or removing stimulus to increase or decrease behavior to me is much more useful. And much of it is to demand more from the dog. More power. More desire.

My training director Lance Collins, a genius, IMO, always says "prey Drive+conflict=power". If you understand this, you understand drives for not only 
Protection, but also obedience. 

So looking at the above equation u can understand how u can obtain loads of power with low prey drive.
Granted, u want all variables as high as possible and that is just genetics of the dogs.

Just my 2cents.


----------



## Timothy Saunders

I have noticed that these drive conversations are killing dog training conversations. Instead of trading training tips we are talking about drive. The same thing with the detection posts. I don' t care what drive the dog is in, as long as the dog does what I want him to do when I need him to do it.


----------



## Brian Anderson

Timothy Saunders said:


> I have noticed that these drive conversations are killing dog training conversations. Instead of trading training tips we are talking about drive. The same thing with the detection posts. I don' t care what drive the dog is in, as long as the dog does what I want him to do when I need him to do it.


Im in!!


----------



## Wayne Dodge

Clark,

I was simply stating that if you are looking for people to explain the way they see things and then add in comments that reflect in my opinion an argumentative manner maybe it would be best to simply state your take and move from there. 

I for one was not trying to judge your ways, I could care less how you train. I do in turn read and listen to the opinions of many other people and take from it what I want. I was offering a suggestion as to how best get to what appeared to me to be your goal; I’m not much of a skirt around the edge kind of guy. 

The response I received from you was confusing for me, for these two reasons:

It seemed as though you didn’t want anyone to judge your written words yet you are writing out your opinions on a public forum. If you are an “I don’t want to discuss the pros and cons of my training system, I would rather show you kind of guy then keep it that way and don’t get involved in open discussions on a forum. If not then you have to be able to reevaluate, articulate and defend or concede your position otherwise it is all for nothing.

I then also had the impression that you were telling me to come on down and work your dog’s so you could show me what your training is capable of…. a kind of challenge in a sense if I understood it right. If this is indeed the case I find it foolish, if not and you are simply looking to train together and share your take on things then that makes more sense.

I don’t care if you are a sport trainer or not, I think some of the very best canine trainers in the world are sport trainers, yet until your ideas and theories are tested under real situations they are only ideas or theories. To say that you don’t guess in training as a matter of routine shows me that your understanding of the vastness associated with numerous potential complications, and variables is limited or that your work is one dimensional and does not take on the true potential of a canine and the areas it can be used in. I train most days, all day long, in many disciplines, in many environments under what most would consider extreme stressors…. I guess (an educated guess in my opinion) as to the actions associated with my canines every day. Anyone that says they rarely guess as to what is going on, or what just happened is playing ball on a nice green field or is blind to what is going on in front of their own eyes. There is no one that can talk with a canine and get the type of feedback we would need to truly understand them, we all make assumptions based upon our education and experiences as to what is going on, there are far too many different opinions based upon education and experience floating around for anyone to really know the answers.

I like the idea of people seeking and sharing knowledge, yet far too many people think they get it, when in fact no one does. Take a second and consider what I have to say, I am only offering my take, that is all.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Good post Wayne. I might add, that to truly see patterns of behavior, you have to be exposed to a lot of dogs over a long period of time. You can't judge anything from 2, 5 0r 10 dogs. JMHO


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Clark Niemitalo said:


> When I say a dog has high prey drive he will also have hunt fight and aggression.


Isn't that what Helmut Raiser calls "booty"?

I wish it were reliably a package deal, but each can be independant of the others, although interrelatedly useful. I've seen plenty of dogs with desire to catch prey, but no hunt, or no aggression. Other dog's having plenty of aggression and hunt, but little prey.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Daryl Ehret said:


> I wish it were reliably a package deal, but each can be independant of the others, although interrelatedly useful. I've seen plenty of dogs with desire to catch prey, but no hunt, or no aggression.


This type of dog does not have high prey drive, IMO. Prey drive is a package deal. We can further break this package into smaller packages in some cases. For instance, herding has most of the components of prey drive but the gripping and aggression are mostly taken out. But prey drive is the entire sequence from stalking to killing. So the more of the small packages that a dog has the more prey drive it has. 



> Other dog's having plenty of aggression and hunt, but little prey.


This makes no sense to me because I believe that aggression and hunt are both components of prey drive.


----------



## Joby Becker

Christopher Smith said:


> This makes no sense to me because I believe that aggression and hunt are both components of prey drive.


sometimes sure...but I wouldnt say all forms of aggression are rooted in prey...

just sayin...

If I broke into your house and your dog aggressively bit me, do you think that is rooted in prey?


----------



## Christopher Smith

Joby Becker said:


> sometimes sure...but I wouldnt say all forms of aggression are rooted in prey...



Did I say "all forms of aggression are rooted in prey" or did I say that " aggression and hunt are both components of prey drive"?


----------



## Joby Becker

Christopher Smith said:


> Did I say "all forms of aggression are rooted in prey" or did I say that " aggression and hunt are both components of prey drive"?


no you did not say that...thanks for the clarification...just figured that was what you were saying, since you stated you did not understand Daryl's post concerning a dog with plenty of aggression being present without much prey..my bad....


----------



## Daryl Ehret

I don't disagree that it should be a package deal, but it should be termed differently for less confusion, not just "prey".

I've known a few dogs with great aggression and hunt drive, with low prey.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Christopher Smith said:


> This type of dog does not have high prey drive, IMO. Prey drive is a package deal. We can further break this package into smaller packages in some cases. For instance, herding has most of the components of prey drive but the gripping and aggression are mostly taken out. But prey drive is the entire sequence from stalking to killing. So the more of the small packages that a dog has the more prey drive it has.
> 
> This makes no sense to me because I believe that aggression and hunt are both components of prey drive.


In herding, you will see the gripping and aggression. PLEASE remember that herding dogs have the same drives as protection dogs. How do I know certain dogs get off on fight and have high fight---I've seen it in the herding context. Livestock will challenge a dog in a New York minute including trying to seriously hurt them and the dogs know it. It will come down to fight or flight. The part that is taken out is the kill, but everying thing else can be there--eye, stalk, orient, chase, gather, block, etc. With the strong herding dogs you will see prey, hunt, aggression [if challenged] and the grips are the same as well. I think thanks to Joby hammering on and on about it, I'm starting to differentiate from prey/challenge/fight from a social hierarchy point of view vs. the dog that really feels threatened and its more fight or fight with my herding dogs. Herding dogs control livestock in a social hierarchy sort of way. I can think of two of my dogs that get off on fight. They revel in it. You see it in their eye and demeanor. Its different than fight in defense. I think for you guys, you speak in levels of prey. In the herding dogs, you can have dogs that will work in play. But if the stock is resistent or a challenge, they will engage in flight/displacement behaviors. They don't have fight and really don't have hunt. The strong hunt dog is going to find the stock and bring them in. In his mind he also can't be outrun in large areas. There are dogs that will give it up if the livestock gets a far enough lead or if they are out of sight.

Terrasita


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> In herding, you will see the gripping and aggression. PLEASE remember that herding dogs have the same drives as protection dogs. How do I know certain dogs get off on fight and have high fight---I've seen it in the herding context. Livestock will challenge a dog in a New York minute including trying to seriously hurt them and the dogs know it. It will come down to fight or flight. The part that is taken out is the kill, but everying thing else can be there--eye, stalk, orient, chase, gather, block, etc. With the strong herding dogs you will see prey, hunt, aggression [if challenged] and the grips are the same as well. I think thanks to Joby hammering on and on about it, I'm starting to differentiate from prey/challenge/fight from a social hierarchy point of view vs. the dog that really feels threatened and its more fight or fight with my herding dogs. Herding dogs control livestock in a social hierarchy sort of way. I can think of two of my dogs that get off on fight. They revel in it. You see it in their eye and demeanor. Its different than fight in defense. I think for you guys, you speak in levels of prey. In the herding dogs, you can have dogs that will work in play. But if the stock is resistent or a challenge, they will engage in flight/displacement behaviors. They don't have fight and really don't have hunt. The strong hunt dog is going to find the stock and bring them in. In his mind he also can't be outrun in large areas. There are dogs that will give it up if the livestock gets a far enough lead or if they are out of sight.
> 
> Terrasita


lets not talk about me hammering anything, rumors are already floating around  glad I could help though


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> lets not talk about me hammering anything, rumors are already floating around  glad I could help though


 
Hahahahahah, LOL. Besides, hammering is not my style.


T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Okay, a couple of corrections while I'm typing too fast:



Terrasita Cuffie said:


> In herding, you will see the gripping and aggression. PLEASE remember that herding dogs have the same drives as protection dogs. How do I know certain dogs get off on fight and have high fight---I've seen it in the herding context. Livestock will challenge a dog in a New York minute including trying to seriously hurt them and the dogs know it. It will come down to fight or flight. The part that is taken out is the kill, but everying thing else can be there--eye, stalk, orient, chase, gather, block, etc. With the strong herding dogs you will see prey, hunt, aggression [if challenged] and the grips are the same as well. I think thanks to Joby hammering on and on about it, I'm starting to differentiate from prey/challenge/fight from a social hierarchy point of view vs. the dog that really feels threatened and its more fight o r *flight *with my herding dogs. Herding dogs control livestock in a social hierarchy sort of way. I can think of two of my dogs that get off on fight. They revel in it. You see it in their eye and demeanor. Its different than fight in defense. I think for you guys, you speak in levels of prey. In the herding dogs, you can have dogs that will work in *prey*. But if the stock is resistent or a challenge, they will engage in flight/displacement behaviors. They don't have fight and really don't have hunt. The strong hunt dog is going to find the stock and bring them in. In his mind he also can't be outrun in large areas. There are dogs that will give it up if the livestock gets a far enough lead or if they are out of sight.
> 
> Terrasita


----------



## Christopher Smith

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> In herding, you will see the gripping and aggression. PLEASE remember that herding dogs have the same drives as protection dogs.


I didn't say otherwise. PLEASE remember that I said " gripping and aggression are *mostly* taken out".


----------



## Christopher Smith

Daryl Ehret said:


> I don't disagree that it should be a package deal, but it should be termed differently for less confusion, not just "prey".
> 
> I've known a few dogs with great aggression and hunt drive, with low prey.


Can we agree to disagree?


----------



## Christopher Smith

Joby Becker said:


> just figured that was what you were saying, since you stated you did not understand Daryl's post concerning a dog with plenty of aggression being present without much prey..my bad....


Thanks for the apology, but your doing the same thing again. I didn't say that I "didn't understand" anything. What I said was "it makes no sense". That is a nice way of saying that something is so outside the realm of possibility that it's preposterous. For instance, If I asked you, what would you do if you were walking down the street and one of the The Seeds mutts jumped out of the car window, immobilized you with a spinal bite and ate your liver while you watched? The premise is so crazy that it makes it unanswerable.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Consider the single purpose black lab narcotics detection dog that's non-aggressive has and great hunt drive... Prey or not prey? We probably can both agree that's not prey, so I disagree that we can agree to disagree ;-)


----------



## Christopher Smith

Daryl Ehret said:


> Consider the single purpose black lab narcotics detection dog that's non-aggressive has and great hunt drive... Prey or not prey?


Not prey, but one component of prey. But I also think that all dogs carry some level of all the components of prey. So the dog that you call non-aggressive I would call *almost* non-aggressive.


----------



## jeremy anderson

5 pages of good reading.....

So prey drive basically has sub categories
*prey
*hunt
*aggression ??
*fight ??

The question I have is how does aggression & fight go into prey? I would think that the prey drive gets them to chase or hunt the item then the aggression & fight would come from pressure by the item turning that defense on. Is that still part of prey? Thanks


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Christopher Smith said:


> I didn't say otherwise. PLEASE remember that I said " gripping and aggression are *mostly* taken out".


Chris, seriously, its a matter of not at all for farm dogs. You need grip and with intent. Stock will know the difference. They know nervy dogs bark and make a lot of noise, with little if anything to back it up. I was taught that the worse thing you can do is take the grip out of the dog. You are training the dogs to respond on command and in certain situations or exhibited behavior. I have rarely used on command grips. The dogs know when and faster than I do. Its that judgement and discernment. Its quick, clean, decisive and the stock respect it. Most of the time with the confident dog, stock won't try them. But there is always a few in the flock or herd that are unpredictable that way. 

T


----------



## Christopher Smith

Yeah I know that. And still stand by my prior post. 

Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk


----------



## Christopher Smith

jeremy anderson said:


> 5 pages of good reading.....
> 
> So prey drive basically has sub categories
> *prey
> *hunt
> *aggression ??
> *fight ??


Not really. I would leave prey off of the list (unless you mean chase) and put the rest of the list under prey. So hunt, aggression, fight combine (plus other stuff) and they equal prey drive. 



> I would think that the prey drive gets them to chase or hunt the item then the aggression & fight would come from pressure by the item turning that defense on. Is that still part of prey? Thanks


I think that you are getting confused by my opinion because you see these things as always separate. I see them as one thing with many components. When I go to work I get into my car. I don't get into my frame, engine, transmission, rear end, gas tank, pistons, ect. But if I have all of those parts, and they are running correctly, I have a car that can take me from place to place in an efficient manner.

So back to dogs. Prey has many different parts, just like a car. And these parts work together. So when a dog chases it's prey I believe that all of the components turn on, although they are turned up or down at certain times during the chase. It's like a gas pedal. Press hard and use more gas, but even at a dead stop a car is using gas. And even when the dog is chasing aggression is not turned completely off.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Christopher Smith said:


> Yeah I know that. And still stand by my prior post.
> 
> Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk



Now I'm off of my mobile and can expound on this. 

I understand what you are saying about the gripping behavior in herding dogs. I have played around with herding with every dog that I have owned in the past 20 years. And from what I have observed their are two things that make me believe that the gripping behavior in herding and protection dogs is different. The first is objective. The *GOOD* herding dog is not gripping to hurt the sheep. Second, most *GOOD* herding dogs release the bite on their own. These things lead me to believe that a GOOD herding dog has a much more inhibited bite than a *GOOD* protection dog.


----------



## Nicole Stark

Christopher Smith said:


> But if I have all of those parts, and they are running correctly, I have a car that can take me from place to place in an efficient manner.
> 
> So back to dogs. Prey has many different parts, just like a car. And these parts work together. So when a dog chases it's prey I believe that all of the components turn on, although they are turned up or down at certain times during the chase. It's like a gas pedal. Press hard and use more gas, but even at a dead stop a car is using gas. And even when the dog is chasing aggression is not turned completely off.


Interesting you should make that comparison. Earlier I started a response saying something a bit similar, which was that I view drives as the vessel/vehicle for genetics, which enables the individual to reach it's intended and often predetermined destination (goal).


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Christopher Smith said:


> Now I'm off of my mobile and can expound on this.
> 
> I understand what you are saying about the gripping behavior in herding dogs. I have played around with herding with every dog that I have owned in the past 20 years. And from what I have observed their are two things that make me believe that the gripping behavior in herding and protection dogs is different. The first is objective. The *GOOD* herding dog is not gripping to hurt the sheep. Second, most *GOOD* herding dogs release the bite on their own. These things lead me to believe that a GOOD herding dog has a much more inhibited bite than a *GOOD* protection dog.


They release if the stock yields. They hold/apply pressure with more than the grip. You're right, with the herding dog, there is a reason and goal behind the grip. Its a different situation with sport dog in how he is worked and trained and how certain drives are exaggerated.

Terrasita


----------



## Christopher Smith

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> They release if the stock yields. They hold/apply pressure with more than the grip. You're right, with the herding dog, there is a reason and goal behind the grip. Its a different situation with sport dog in how he is worked and trained and how certain drives are exaggerated.
> 
> Terrasita


I don't think that the difference is just with the way that the dog is worked and trained. I think that the biggest difference is genetic. The good herding dogs have a much more inhibited bite than the good protection dogs.


----------



## jeremy anderson

Christopher Smith said:


> I think that you are getting confused by my opinion because you see these things as always separate. I see them as one thing with many components. When I go to work I get into my car. I don't get into my frame, engine, transmission, rear end, gas tank, pistons, ect. But if I have all of those parts, and they are running correctly, I have a car that can take me from place to place in an efficient manner.
> 
> So back to dogs. Prey has many different parts, just like a car. And these parts work together. So when a dog chases it's prey I believe that all of the components turn on, although they are turned up or down at certain times during the chase. It's like a gas pedal. Press hard and use more gas, but even at a dead stop a car is using gas. And even when the dog is chasing aggression is not turned completely off.


This makes sense to me, thank you.


----------



## Bob Scott

Christopher Smith said:


> I don't think that the difference is just with the way that the dog is worked and trained. I think that the biggest difference is genetic. The good herding dogs have a much more inhibited bite than the good protection dogs.


In the HGH style of herding the GSD uses it's grip whenever needed. It's not necessarily inhibited because it can and will use a full grip but it's mainly to grip wool to control the stock. I've seen it in my own GSD and gripping the wool over the shoulders or on the flanks seems instinctive with him.
Even in AHBA a grip isn't a problem "IF" it's done correctly and justified. In AKC a DQ is almost a given.
I agree that the correct grip is genetic and a good dog instinctively will let go when it has the stock under control.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Bob Scott said:


> In the HGH style of herding the GSD uses it's grip whenever needed. It's not necessarily inhibited because it can and will use a full grip but it's mainly to grip wool to control the stock. I've seen it in my own GSD and gripping the wool over the shoulders or on the flanks seems instinctive with him.
> Even in AHBA a grip isn't a problem "IF" it's done correctly and justified. In AKC a DQ is almost a given.
> I agree that the correct grip is genetic and a good dog instinctively will let go when it has the stock under control.


 
I guess for me, having seen the grip in both context--instinct and trained and the protection trained dog in herding, I think a little differently than Chris. Also, in terms of "good," we look at placement, justification, calmness and as a means to get control. I think you would have to define "good in protection." I would imagine its just a genetic desire to bite--regardless. Compared to that, the herding dog would be inhibited. Yeah, usually in AKC, you are removed for a grip but it really can depend on the judge and the character of the grip. There are still judges in AKC that are full time stockmen. Many people are afraid to trial under Nile Sealine a BC judge. He's really one of those older guys I like to watch, listen and learn from---especially on reading livestock. I had my GSD Teva entered under him down at Jim New's. Jim's St. Croix are more of the fight variety. You had one sheep turning on and dissing Teva throughout the course. She was my patient finesse dog. Suddenly heading toward the #4, she tagged her with a full grip across the withers and held her. I was mortified and new I had NQ'd. He gave her second in the class. He ws notorious for NQ'ing BCs for a grip. He said it was justified and done correctly. I was blown away. Teva did have her BC judge fans---especially in AHBA ranch which was her forte.

T


----------



## Christopher Smith

Bob Scott said:


> In the HGH style of herding the GSD uses it's grip whenever needed. It's not necessarily inhibited because it can and will use a full grip but it's mainly to grip wool to control the stock. I've seen it in my own GSD and gripping the wool over the shoulders or on the flanks seems instinctive with him.


Does the dog seek to kill the sheep with his bite? No. That means the grip is inhibited.

The very fact that the dog is only gripping the wool at certain parts of the body shows inhibition.






> I agree that the correct grip is genetic and a good dog instinctively will let go when it has the stock under control.


If the dog lets go on it's own he is inhibited (maybe scared). If he wasn't he would kill the sheep.

Bob, good herding dogs have a more inhibited bite than a good protection dog.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Christopher Smith said:


> Does the dog seek to kill the sheep with his bite? No. That means the grip is inhibited.
> 
> The very fact that the dog is only gripping the wool at certain parts of the body shows inhibition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the dog lets go on it's own he is inhibited (maybe scared). If he wasn't he would kill the sheep.
> 
> Bob, good herding dogs have a more inhibited bite than a good protection dog.


Kill is truncated. That has nothing to do with fear. He's not letting go because he is scared. He lets go because he has accomplished his goal--submission. You aren't saying that good protection dogs are out to kill are you? There are two separate things going on in this discussion--the grip itself and then desire for gripping/biting. The genetic grip [i.e. full, calm] will be the same. The reason/goal for the grip may be different in the protection dog vs. herding dog. I think your "good" characterization of the protection dog needs to be defined. Have you worked your protection trained dogs on livestock. Were they in kill mode or grip for the hell of grip mode without displaying any of the classic herding behaviors? 

T


----------



## Bob Scott

Christopher Smith said:


> Does the dog seek to kill the sheep with his bite? No. That means the grip is inhibited.
> 
> The very fact that the dog is only gripping the wool at certain parts of the body shows inhibition.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If the dog lets go on it's own he is inhibited (maybe scared). If he wasn't he would kill the sheep.
> 
> Bob, good herding dogs have a more inhibited bite than a good protection dog.



It's all about the job. My SCH III has a nice grip in both venues and he doesn't need an out command to back off of stock. To say he's fearfull...well I gues you'd have to see him do both. Terrisita has. That's how I got into herding because she liked what she saw and proved to me that the instincts can be applied to both correctly "IF" the dog is correct. 
The original HGH test included a phase that showed protection of the shepherd.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Bob Scott said:


> It's all about the job. My SCH III has a nice grip in both venues and he doesn't need an out command to back off of stock. To say he's fearfull...well I gues you'd have to see him do both. Terrisita has. That's how I got into herding because she liked what she saw and proved to me that the instincts can be applied to both correctly "IF" the dog is correct.
> The original HGH test included a phase that showed protection of the shepherd.


Yeah, its Thunder and Doc that I think of in this discussion. It came down to nitpicking but Thunder had that balance in drives; the social characteristics I like, instinctive territoriality/guard, trainability and I was dying to test him. He didn't disappoint along with several of the other RDWC club dogs. Getting to know and work him in training added even more to my perceptions as the dual dog. They are supposed to balanced enough to serve both capacities. He is.

Terrasita


----------



## Christopher Smith

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Kill is truncated. That has nothing to do with fear. He's not letting go because he is scared. He lets go because he has accomplished his goal--submission. You aren't saying that good protection dogs are out to kill are you?


No, that would be a great one if it was able to be controlled.









Are you and Bob saying that no herding dog has ever let go because it was scared? 




> The genetic grip [i.e. full, calm] will be the same.


 This is different than my experience. 



> Have you worked your protection trained dogs on livestock. Were they in kill mode or grip for the hell of grip mode without displaying any of the classic herding behaviors?


I took my current Malinois out for herding training a few months ago. My dog bites pretty good has never come off a bite or showed a big position changes on the sleeve. I brought him out to the sheep and he lost his mind. He caught one by the hock and brought it to a complete stop in the space of about 8 feet. When the sheep went down he then shifted to the rib of the sheep and bit. He could not get much of a grip there and moved to the side of the neck/ear area. I then had to choke him off of the sheep. Was he trying to kill it? You make the call.

This is him at about 16 months http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrUDWv99GVM


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

They don't let go because they are scared of the sheep--not the dogs we work. Its possible with others. As for the video of the bite work, I thought you were going to have one of sheep. A dog in for the kill of sheep/goats, goes for the throat in a split second. They don't mess around with it. It like happens within a blink. They know where to strike. The bite and hold thing can go a couple of different ways. But this is what I mean by the desire to bite/fill the mouth and hold on, regardless. You see it in the KNPV puppy videos. They fill their mouths with the suit and that is the goal/purpose--just to bite. But if that was your session one and you didn't have to write a check, for sure session 2 and 3 when he amped further, you could be filling your freezer.

T


----------



## Christopher Smith

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> They don't let go because they are scared of the sheep--not the dogs we work. Its possible with others.


Cool. Now we are on the same page.




> As for the video of the bite work, I thought you were going to have one of sheep. A dog in for the kill of sheep/goats, goes for the throat in a split second. They don't mess around with it.


 I think they do that with more experience. 



> But this is what I mean by the desire to bite/fill the mouth and hold on, regardless. You see it in the KNPV puppy videos. They fill their mouths with the suit and that is the goal/purpose--just to bite.


KNPV? Are you sure you don't mean NVBK?


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Christopher Smith said:


> Cool. Now we are on the same page.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think they do that with more experience.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KNPV? Are you sure you don't mean NVBK?


Naahhhh, I know of a corgi bred off of my puppy's sire line that did it. That's why there is no saving the stock--too quick. He went underneath and to the throat. The ones that take them down will next go to the throat. Not sure about wild kills and other parts of the body. I was pretty sure the puppies were KNPV dutchies. Uggghhhh, now that we've gotten into gory.

T


----------



## Bob Scott

Of course some will let go out of fear! I don't think anyone will say that it "never" happens. You'll see that in some "trial" dogs. Obvious as hell that they don't want to be there but chances are they aren't going to grip in the first place unless they feel threatened but that's not what a good stock dog is about. 
Even without the nip and duck used by most BCs the GSD is a totally different herder. It's just that if your going to trial the GSD the judges are (usually) looking for a BC type behavior unless he's familiar with GSD herding. 
Seeing a dog that goes in for the kill is never going to be confused with a dog that is working stock if you have any sense of dog behavior or stock work. 
Herding is no different then sport work or street K9s in that it's all about selection!


----------



## Brian Anderson

Herding is no different then sport work or street K9s in that it's all about selection!

This sentence sums it all up nicely. :grin:


----------



## Melody Greba

I took my current Malinois out for herding training a few months ago. My dog bites pretty good has never come off a bite or showed a big position changes on the sleeve. I brought him out to the sheep and he lost his mind. He caught one by the hock and brought it to a complete stop in the space of about 8 feet. When the sheep went down he then shifted to the rib of the sheep and bit. He could not get much of a grip there and moved to the side of the neck/ear area. I then had to choke him off of the sheep. Was he trying to kill it? You make the call.
This is him at about 16 months [URL said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrUDWv99GVM[/URL]



Sounds like a situation of reactive response and a dog that just was biting out of reflex and not thought. 

My Std Schnauzer was reactive to sheep if she got in the fence and would chase mindlessly until she got one down. I know my gsd would be like this on sheep too. Highly reactive. GSD, Aja the female littermate to my male goes inside the fence with sheep all the time during farmwork and is very controllable. 

Mal, Army is completely non-reactive in the pasture with sheep or cattle, he pretends they don't exist unless threatened. If a steer or ram thinks about being aggressive he nips it in the bud, head on and immediately then goes back to his own business. 

Army's traits I think, are ringsport bred, rather than reactionary bred dogs that obviously succeeds in service and sch but doesn't test and promote self-discipline during high stimuli to the degree that I noticed in ring. (and sch is my sport so don't kill the messenger, JMHO)


----------



## Christopher Smith

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Naahhhh, I know of a corgi bred off of my puppy's sire line that did it.


And you know plenty more dogs with intent to kill the sheep that didn't.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Bob Scott said:


> Of course some will let go out of fear! I don't think anyone will say that it "never" happens. You'll see that in some "trial" dogs. Obvious as hell that they don't want to be there but chances are they aren't going to grip in the first place unless they feel threatened but that's not what a good stock dog is about.
> Even without the nip and duck used by most BCs the GSD is a totally different herder. It's just that if your going to trial the GSD the judges are (usually) looking for a BC type behavior unless he's familiar with GSD herding.
> Seeing a dog that goes in for the kill is never going to be confused with a dog that is working stock if you have any sense of dog behavior or stock work.
> Herding is no different then sport work or street K9s in that it's all about selection!


Great post Captain Obvious! :mrgreen:


----------



## Christopher Smith

Melody Greba said:


> Sounds like a situation of reactive response and a dog that just was biting out of reflex and not thought.....
> 
> Mal, Army is completely non-reactive in the pasture with sheep or cattle, he pretends they don't exist unless threatened. If a steer or ram thinks about being aggressive he nips it in the bud, head on and immediately then goes back to his own business.


I think that you don't know what reactive means. 

Reactive: readily responsive to stimuli. A dog's reactivity level does not necessarily have anything to do with an aggressive response. 



> Army's traits I think, are ringsport bred, rather than reactionary bred dogs that obviously succeeds in service and sch but doesn't test and promote self-discipline during high stimuli to the degree that I noticed in ring. (and sch is my sport so don't kill the messenger, JMHO)


I don't think that dogs have "self discipline". I put that with other nonsense like "work ethic" and "genetic obedience". 

Your dog Army is as much schutzhund bred as he is ring sport bred.


----------



## Melody Greba

Christopher Smith said:


> Reactive: readily responsive to stimuli. A dog's reactivity level does not necessarily have anything to do with an aggressive response.
> 
> I don't think that dogs have "self discipline". I put that with other nonsense like "work ethic" and "genetic obedience".
> 
> Your dog Army is as much schutzhund bred as he is ring sport bred.


I agree that reactivity does not have to have an aggressive response. It can have different responses depending on breed. To come to conclusion that your mal was trying to kill the sheep is undetermined. My bet is that he was acting out of reactivity to a prey animal and as one that was inexperienced and just mauling it. 

There is a difference b/t that and an experienced animal and it also depends upon the prey. 

There are some dogs that will come upon a ground hog and will only strike seriously if the animal is running. Others will dodge the defensive nature and try and grab it. Others and much depends on maturity and others on their nature, get bit and bite with a crushing blow. 

What you chose not to see is that a highly reactive dog in prot dog sports does not have a calculating thought process and has to be handled/controlled. Part of the behavior is taught and part is genetics. Re: differences b/t working BCs and ACDs.


----------



## Melody Greba

Christopher Smith said:


> Your dog Army is as much schutzhund bred as he is ring sport bred.


You know Army???

I knew his sire from the time he was imported and throughout his working lifetime. Nitro was clearly a Nelton son, by nature. 

Army is very much a Nitro son by nature also. 

Those mals have a range in genetics. Some are weaker in some areas, some stronger in others. Some highly versatile, some ok.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

> What you chose not to see is that a highly reactive dog in prot dog sports does not have a calculating thought process and has to be handled/controlled. Part of the behavior is taught and part is genetics. Re: differences b/t working BCs and ACDs.


Bingo.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Melody Greba said:


> My bet is that he was acting out of reactivity to a prey animal and as one that was inexperienced and just mauling it.


Why? Why would the dog maul the sheep? What is the purpose of mauling? Is there a "mauling drive" too? 

There is a difference b/t that and an experienced animal and it also depends upon the prey. 





> What you chose not to see is that a highly reactive dog in prot dog sports does not have a calculating thought process and has to be handled/controlled.


I choose not to see fairies, leprechauns, gnomes too. I'm just crazy like that.


----------



## Christopher Smith

Melody Greba said:


> You know Army???


No, just the pedigree.


> Nitro was clearly a Nelton son, by nature.


What traits lead you to believe that? 





> Those mals have a range in genetics. Some are weaker in some areas, some stronger in others. Some highly versatile, some ok.


Aren't all lines like that? Why do you feel that it is significant enough in this line to mention?


----------



## Christopher Smith

Don Turnipseed said:


> Bingo.


Bingo, is what you need to be playing instead of fantasizing about all the things you think you know.


----------



## Melody Greba

Christopher Smith said:


> Why? Why would the dog maul the sheep? What is the purpose of mauling? Is there a "mauling drive" too


Over-stimulation


----------



## Melody Greba

Christopher Smith said:


> Aren't all lines like that? Why do you feel that it is significant enough in this line to mention?


The french ring dogs have characteristics, true to thier lines, so do the dutch dogs and the german bred mals. Differences in their characteristics of strengths or weakness of drives and nerves for specific sport purpose. 

Just as any breeder that has participated in sport for a long time, he produces what he likes to work with in his lines. And much of that is dependent upon what sport he does.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Christopher Smith said:


> Bingo, is what you need to be playing instead of fantasizing about all the things you think you know.


Chris, only because most of what I post is over your head...as is what Melody is saying.


----------



## Sara Waters

Christopher Smith said:


> Why? Why would the dog maul the sheep? What is the purpose of mauling? Is there a "mauling drive" too?


Unfortunately dogs do maul sheep. It is sickening having to go put severely mauled dying sheep down after roaming dogs have had their "fun" with a flock of sheep. I dont know what the drive is but it surely happens. Probably over stimulation as Melody mentions.

More unusual but even ponies have been mauled by roaming packs of dogs.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Christopher Smith said:


> And you know plenty more dogs with intent to kill the sheep that didn't.


 No, don't see intent and it didn't happen. I can only think of a couple of dogs over the years that I didn't let off a long line. Mostly kill has been bred out. If they intend, they do and they know how. Some will run them to death and the sheep die of exhaustion. Some bite at and all over. But if you like the idea that he had intent to kill but just didn't have the experience to know how or get the job done--okay.


T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Christopher Smith said:


> Why? Why would the dog maul the sheep? What is the purpose of mauling? Is there a "mauling drive" too?
> 
> There is a difference b/t that and an experienced animal and it also depends upon the prey.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I choose not to see fairies, leprechauns, gnomes too. I'm just crazy like that.


There's the bite for just the bite itself that some folks seems to be breeding/selecting for. Prey stimulation--bite, hold on and don't let go. You don't necessarily have to have kill to get that if you look at the chain.

T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Michael Fox prey/hunt sequence. 


1. Tracking [scent]
2. Trailing [sight]
3. Cast
4. Block
5. Drive
6. Cut off
7. Chase
8. Snap at appendages
9. Kill/bite
10. Carry
11. Dissection


----------



## Don Turnipseed

T, what kind of dog is Micheal J Fox building that sequence on? Breaking it down and compartmentalizing way to much. Trailing is done by sight ? Thought that was the chase. Doesn't even make sense. Snapping appendages????


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Don Turnipseed said:


> T, what kind of dog is Micheal J Fox building that sequence on? Breaking it down and compartmentalizing way to much. Trailing is done by sight ? Thought that was the chase. Doesn't even make sense. Snapping appendages????


Trailing--maybe sight hounds. He breaks it down by several breed groups to demonstrate which traits have been selected for and/or accentuated. Snapping at appendages--watch the cattle breeds. Tested a cattle dog puppy last week--that's about all it did. Actually, I see all of the behaviors in the herding dogs except the kill, dissect, etc. All of this was done to characterize behaviors along the chain; particularly with ACDs. In essence, the dogs can truncate anywhere along the chain. For instance a really sticky BC doesn't get beyond eye/stalk. I'll have to go hunt up the book--doing this from memory.

T


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Thanks. Makes more sense now.


----------



## Daryl Ehret

The better question is, _how is this useful?_


----------



## ann schnerre

ask chris--i'm sure he knows, daryl.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Daryl Ehret said:


> The better question is, _how is this useful?_


How is what useful?

T


----------



## Daryl Ehret

Is there some meaningful purpose behind the "sequence", that makes it somehow useful information? It appears like the basis for an enneagram, just clunky/awkward. It might serve best in flow chart form, as many of the steps could easily be skipped in certain contexts, some could repeatedly loop (i.e., quarry escapes, must recapture).

If it's just divying up the "booty", there's no mention of _trophy defense, possessiveness, or fight drive_, it doesn't encompass my more basic "find it / catch it / _keep it_" sequence (for distingquishing a variability for 3 drives of primary interest; hunt/catch/fight).



Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Michael Fox prey/hunt sequence.
> 
> 
> 1. Tracking [scent]
> 2. Trailing [sight]
> 3. Cast
> 4. Block
> 5. Drive
> 6. Cut off
> 7. Chase
> 8. Snap at appendages
> 9. Kill/bite
> 10. Carry
> 11. Dissection


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Daryl Ehret said:


> Is there some meaningful purpose behind the "sequence", that makes it somehow useful information? It appears like the basis for an enneagram, just clunky/awkward. It might serve best in flow chart form, as many of the steps could easily be skipped in certain contexts, some could repeatedly loop (i.e., quarry escapes, must recapture).
> 
> If it's just divying up the "booty", there's no mention of _trophy defense, possessiveness, or fight drive_, it doesn't encompass my more basic "find it / catch it / _keep it_" sequence (for distingquishing a variability for 3 drives of primary interest; hunt/catch/fight).


 
If you breed stock dogs, its entirely useful. It also encompasses your more simplistic three drives only with more detail for specific traits. For instance, I like a dog that hs 1, 3, 4, 5. Traits can truncate anywhere along the chain so you want multiple traits. Fight drive will come further down. There are dogs that as ong s the prey is running away they are fine. Once the prey turns on them they will give it up--i.e. fight/flight. Possession implies competition for the prey. Amongst animals there is a pack hierarchy and that wiill determine who gets what and when. So in terms of food agression and resource guarding, this is what you would see. But in an established pack, I don't think you see too much of this. There is the sequence of events and whether what traits the dog has. Some dogs don't have eye stalk. Some are excessive blockers so they will effectively just keep going to the heads and ringing the stock--highly ineffective for stock management. So in a cattle dog you wnt a header and a heeler in the same dog. You can have bite/fight without kill. Just as all this is a pack relationship in nature, it is in herding. They deliver the stock to me. There is PURPOSE in all of this. So the job at hand dictates the behavior. Looking at "bite" from a herding context, particularly with cattle encompasses fight--for herders. The bite is to control motion--either to stop it or start it. If the cow decides he doesn't want to go where the dog tells him, it can act aggressively--fight/bite. Every animal has a fight/flight zone. I actually watched Balabanov work this with a dog at a seminar--pretty cool. There are dogs that will back away from the pressure bubble or go into it to get control. Some BCs are bred to stay outside of the pressure--usually the ones with excessive cast and they aren't coming into a fight/flight zone for love or money. Some will have natural cast and come into the pressure [especially with work/training]. A lot of non-BCs don't have natural cast and are bred to come into the pressure bubble and they will do so with stock fight and flight. So we train cast. Some dogs don't have bite at all or fight for that matter. I can pick my puppy but really I won't know whether he has defense until he is older. I've seen puppies that even though the stock was acting aggressively they didn't see it as challenging or threatening behavior. A year later they did and that's where you will see where you have fight/flight. My 16 week old extreme puppy Rhemy already sees a challenge and if the stock faces him off or moves toward him, he is instantly forward in response. I know his sire line produces fight. This is where the testing and selection comes in. I select against fear. You can have a dog with fight but it can have a nervy frantic quality to it or they generalize it regardless of the stock's behavior. That's not what I want with the stock. So I'm looking for the best general temperament [environment and people] coupled with the herding/prey/hunt traits and I usually get a dog with fight when challenged and usually with guard if the stock comes after me. I can refine further and get into whether the dog has analysis or what I call expectation/reactivity. 

So again, sequence of events but also single traits within a dog. If you watch some of the videos of hunting packs or even herding packs, dogs will have their own individual job within the sequence and they work together. Years ago I kept trying to figure out how my old crippled dog was catching squirrels. She wasn't. Saw the younger Teva through the dining room window. She did the cast, block behavior and directed it toward Asta, whereupon she grabbed it. She would also catch them and take them to Asta. When I was running yelling through the house for Asta to drop it with one of these, Asta tried to bury it before I got there. Shows you where I was in the pack hierarchy.

T


----------



## Sara Waters

I have to admit that I dont find it particularly useful understanding all this stuff. With herding dogs and I only understand the the BC and kelpie many of the traits where ever they come from are inherited separately. An understanding of this and how you might select for what you want to me is ultimately more important. 

I have big casting dog that has no problem coming into pressure and many in his line are like this or they would not have been bred. A big casting dog with no force is useless and noone I know what bother breeding for that. We need tha big cast given the large areas and large mobs of sheep, but we also need the dog to be able to move stock quickly and effieciently, if it doesnt it is gone.

Knowing the BC has the casting trait that can be selected for separately, I have no wish to have to train it, I would rather breed for it, combined with good force and calmness, mob cover, short cover etc. There are a raft of traits out there that can be selected. The trick is capturing what you want in a dog. To me where they came from is really of only passing interest.


----------



## Melody Greba

T:

Excellent description and thank you for taking the time!


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Sara Waters said:


> I have to admit that I dont find it particularly useful understanding all this stuff. With herding dogs and I only understand the the BC and kelpie many of the traits where ever they come from are inherited separately. An understanding of this and how you might select for what you want to me is ultimately more important.
> 
> I have big casting dog that has no problem coming into pressure and many in his line are like this or they would not have been bred. A big casting dog with no force is useless and noone I know what bother breeding for that. We need tha big cast given the large areas and large mobs of sheep, but we also need the dog to be able to move stock quickly and effieciently, if it doesnt it is gone.
> 
> Knowing the BC has the casting trait that can be selected for separately, I have no wish to have to train it, I would rather breed for it, combined with good force and calmness, mob cover, short cover etc. There are a raft of traits out there that can be selected. The trick is capturing what you want in a dog. To me where they came from is really of only passing interest.


The reason the line has it is because someone selected for those traits. Initially, they got into a lot of trouble selecting for that pretty cast without regard for the dog that would come into the bubble and push or work in close contact areas. Same thing with ACDs that would heel only. If all you need is a hill dog then, the big cast may be primary. Some of the Scottish talking about working with multiple dogs that bring different traits to the table and have the job matching that. When interviewed some actually frowned upon the idea of one dog for all jobs. So if you are a breeder building and maintaining a line then you care where particular traits came from and who is dominant for producing so you don't lose it. 

T


----------



## Joby Becker

own the grip, work the grip, own the man...

is that good enough...???


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Joby Becker said:


> own the grip, work the grip, own the man...
> 
> is that good enough...???


 
If you can get him to grip and keep gripping, I guess so-- for the bite/fight sport scenarios. For the herders, that's totally useless. Next comes the LE/Military context. Trainability, reliability in social situations including the pack angle??

T


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> If you can get him to grip and keep gripping, I guess so-- for the bite/fight sport scenarios. For the herders, that's totally useless. Next comes the LE/Military context. Trainability, reliability in social situations including the pack angle??
> 
> T


herding is obviously not applicable..

the LE/military context is applicable..


----------



## Joby Becker

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> If you can get him to grip and keep gripping, I guess so-- for the bite/fight sport scenarios.
> 
> T


what sport fits my signature of:

Own the grip...work the grip...own the man...

just curious..

as I did not think of that quote, in a sport context...


----------



## Gillian Schuler

Clark Niemitalo said:


> Oh and my defination of drive is determination..The main source is prey the others are layers.


I find I can best come to terms with this definition.

I'm not sure what you mean about layers but without determination, the drives are useless in my mind.

I'm not sure how to "attack" this. In protection, my Briard had the drive but, maybe not the determination although his efforts ended in IPO 3 and with good results. But at one trial, totally driven up by seeing the helper doing "gymnastics" nearby to counteract the cold, he set off for the long flight and tried to "shove" the helper out of the field. It might have been his instincts as a herding dog but "no bite" is no bite. Actually, the drive was there to go but the "follow-up" wasn't - maybe due to the breed.

I now have two GSDs whose grips are exemplary. Their tracking drives are high, and, and this is where we as handlers come in, their determination to work out the end of the track is necessary.

*It is not the "drives" we affect but the "determination" to succeed that we can destroy or enhance!!*


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Joby Becker said:


> what sport fits my signature of:
> 
> Own the grip...work the grip...own the man...
> 
> just curious..
> 
> as I did not think of that quote, in a sport context...


 Poker...it's how well you play the hand. 
IF the dog can make the person or helper think they are "bad" it's game over!


----------



## Sara Waters

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> The reason the line has it is because someone selected for those traits. Initially, they got into a lot of trouble selecting for that pretty cast without regard for the dog that would come into the bubble and push or work in close contact areas. Same thing with ACDs that would heel only. If all you need is a hill dog then, the big cast may be primary. Some of the Scottish talking about working with multiple dogs that bring different traits to the table and have the job matching that. When interviewed some actually frowned upon the idea of one dog for all jobs. So if you are a breeder building and maintaining a line then you care where particular traits came from and who is dominant for producing so you don't lose it.
> 
> T


My understanding is that the cast is a trait inherited separately of other traits. A dog may cast and keep wide of sheep because it is actually a pressure break, mistaken perhaps for a cast ( perhaps even starting off straight and then swinging wide around the sheep). Like true width, a dog can appear to have width but it is not true width it is actually a poor dog reacting to pressure (like my kelpie). So some traits appear to be there but they are not really.

It is very interesting thinking about it all. The cast is primary to many of us especially in hilly, granite outcrop country, but then so is the ability of the dog to have a number of other charateristics. A farmer with a poor casting dog will often take the dog to the sheep on the back of a motorbike these days which wasnt really done in the old days obviously. Some farmers without a good casting dog will sometimes bring the sheep in on mbikes and then use the dogs in the yards.

Certainly some farmers talk about using the BC as a paddock dog and then having kelpies in the yard as yard dogs. This will occur if they dont have a good allrounder and they will use what they have or their motorbikes. Farmers wont bother training a cast, they just hop on their bikes. If the dog is good in the yards they will do this otherwise they get rid of the dog and start again.

However a really top BC or kelpie or mix thereof can do all the jobs and a few very good breeders strive for this type of dog as it is possible. A kelpie with those allround charateristics fetched $6000 at a recent sheepdog auction and some fetch quite a bit more than that in the bigger auctions. 

The people that bred my BC (they also breed kelpies) have some extra good dogs - mainly BCs that out of quite a large number of dogs they tend to use these on a regular basis because they are good allround dogs and they can use them in any situation. These are also the dogs they tend to breed from.

Generally farmers have greatly reduced the number of sheep they run due to endless droughts and most really only want to be bothered with one or two dogs. My BC is not the perfect dog for sure, his main problem is that he is too busy, however he is really the only dog I bother with when working my sheep. My koolie is quite a good dog working close as he has plenty of force and a good bark if he needs it so I have discovered, he is also not as busy, but he doesnt have a cast, a handy yard dog. However I just find it easier to take my BC as he as everything I need to get the job done. I am talking sheep here.

In terms of where the traits come from, when I have spoken to breeders, they know which dog has what and what traits are inherited separately and about traits they may appear to be there but are actually not real etc what their goals are but I have never heard them talking about where those traits come from in terms how we are talking in this tread. I will have to ask them.


----------



## Sara Waters

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Some of the Scottish talking about working with multiple dogs that bring different traits to the table and have the job matching that. When interviewed some actually frowned upon the idea of one dog for all jobs.
> T


Not sure why you would frown on good allround dogs, especially if you know that they can bre bred for. Multiple dogs would be a PITA for most of our farmers who go in and out of sheep depending on the run of seasons. They just really want one or two good dogs that will handle most situations. Really a good BC or kelpie can bring all the required traits to the table in our sheep cropping systems.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Sara, you know your dogs invidual persnalities in regards to confidence. Is the casting out further really attributable to a "drive" or is that dog more confident? Or is that dog naturally more indpendent than the others. When placing my own, I specifically look for the indpendent dogs for hunting the way I do, but, if the pup is going to be used in a venue where closer in work(and more extensive training) is beneficial, I look for the more dependent pup that will work closer in. I never looked at this kind of thing like a drive at all....but, I have never seen drives broke down, such as the one put on here, to encompass every move the dog makes.


----------



## Sara Waters

Don Turnipseed said:


> Sara, you know your dogs invidual persnalities in regards to confidence. Is the casting out further really attributable to a "drive" or is that dog more confident? Or is that dog naturally more indpendent than the others. When placing my own, I specifically look for the indpendent dogs for hunting the way I do, but, if the pup is going to be used in a venue where closer in work(and more extensive training) is beneficial, I look for the more dependent pup that will work closer in. I never looked at this kind of thing like a drive at all....but, I have never seen drives broke down, such as the one put on here, to encompass every move the dog makes.


My BC is very confident and um high drive(what does that mean LOL) and he has determination to use that drive to work as Gillian mentions.

He has inherited the casting trait, which is genetic. He has also inherited force but it is not as controlled as I would like in some cases. So calmness and controlled force is what is best. I dont really think in terms of depencence and independence, it is more about what traits they have inherited and how I can use them or train them to fill the gaps. My kelpie is more willing to listen to me but she doesnt have force so is useless if the sheep dont lift themselves for example or working in close with difficult sheep. 

She is pretty high drive though in that she is full of energy, loves to play and runs agility well, likes hunting rabbits, she just is not a good stock dog as she lacks some fundamental inherited traits. I dont know how to describe what she is in terms of different drives. She works light stock well.

The blind cast is inherited separately to the sighted cast, so when sending a dog off to look for stock out of sight, a good dog has inherited that ability not a function of independence although other traits will influence the use of that trait so if it doesnt have the other inherited charateristics and temperament needed to bring the mob to you then it is not much good.

In some areas if you are working rough country and are drenching sheep in distant yards a long way from home, you need a couple of dogs that will muster sheep as well as work them through the yards. These are good utility or all round dogs. Your mustering dogs must also be capable of doing the yard work or they are not much use in this situation where you cant have a dog for every occassion.

I think more in terms of the job needed to be done the traits available to do those jobs. My next dog I would love a really good utility dog with the neccessary instincts and determination to get the job from paddock to yards done. My current BC does it reasonably well so I am not in a hurry.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Cast doesn't necessarily have anything to do with people or environmental confidence or independence. Also, the sequence posted is only relevant to the what is considered the prey-hunt sequence, not every move the dog makes. It has nothing to do per se with the dogs relationship to the humans and how he lives as a house dog or his confidence with humans and adaptability to different environments.. For my dogs, the blind cast has more to do with tracking. They use their nose to locate them. Once located, you see the cast. 

T


----------



## Sara Waters

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> Cast doesn't necessarily have anything to do with people or environmental confidence or independence. Also, the sequence posted is only relevant to the what is considered the prey-hunt sequence, not every move the dog makes. It has nothing to do per se with the dogs relationship to the humans and how he lives as a house dog or his confidence with humans and adaptability to different environments.. For my dogs, the blind cast has more to do with tracking. They use their nose to locate them. Once located, you see the cast.
> 
> T


My understanding of the blind cast is that a dog that has inherited the blind cast will keep casting out untill it finds the sheep. It may cast out and stop and listen and scent and then cast out again. My dog does what you say - he tracks them and then casts, but according to a collie breeder this is not the true inherited searching cast. However the ability to use scent is also the hallmarks of a good dog and a good mustering dog may find sheep by tracking rather than casting out - it will track the sheep as my dog and your dog does and then cast out. My dog has tracked some lost sheep of mine 4 km away onto a neighbours property.

Then a good mustering dog will also have a casting break. It breaks out if it sees sheep further on, it always keeps on its side of the sheep and never crosses between sheep. They can also have the inherited ability to look for sheep, they will look left and right for sheep while casting and even if they see sheep they will still keep looking as they inherently understand that there could be more sheep and will often leave the sheep that they spot as they look for others.

.


----------



## Melody Greba

I appreciate reading about the real working herders and their working together, finding their job within the pack, and have specific instinctual traits for the work. Is a a natural dog that does not need specialized training to complete the work it was bred to do. I've read some herding info prior to this but not for a long while. But truly embrace the philosophy and the honesty of the real herding dog personalities. 

Early on in this thread, the prot sport dogs were mentioned in regards to herding. I came in, in the middle toward the end. This is when I mentioned reactionary vs non-reactive. I think the gsd dog in the 70s was a less reactive dog and more instinctive. 

But since prot dog sports became a driving force for breeding, reactionary dogs are easy to stimulate for the decoy, some have become in such high drive that the thought process is only there with heavy compulsion; they are sport specialists that are easily be bridged into police work. Drive, drive, drive....focus it, mould it, and points for it. Makes for a high percentage of successful pups in a litter for sport/police providing the trainer has the talent.

I am not saying that people who herd sheep are not talented. As they are highly experienced and have great indepth knowledge of stock and dogs. They just let the dogs do the preponderance of the work instead of breaking it down into incremental training pieces. 

Right dog for the right job.


----------



## Howard Gaines III

Melody Greba said:


> ...
> 
> I am not saying that people who herd sheep are not talented. As they are highly experienced and have great indepth knowledge of stock and dogs. They just let the dogs do the preponderance of the work instead of breaking it down into incremental training pieces.
> 
> Right dog for the right job.


 I don't agree!!!! Teaching herding, like anything, IS broken in smaller steps. Dogs chase, part of the prey drive. Teaching them HOW to control stock and HOW to move them is incremental training. :-\"


----------



## Don Turnipseed

I disagree with you Howard. While it is a matter of training, knowledgable folks, that make a living working stock on a dailey basis, let experienced dogs do "most" the teaching when it comes to the actual work. The owner is more of a director. That is what a good dog is bred for. An experienced dog is worth it's weight in gold as a teacher of young dogs.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Melody Greba said:


> I appreciate reading about the real working herders and their working together, finding their job within the pack, and have specific instinctual traits for the work. Is a a natural dog that does not need specialized training to complete the work it was bred to do. I've read some herding info prior to this but not for a long while. But truly embrace the philosophy and the honesty of the real herding dog personalities.
> 
> Early on in this thread, the prot sport dogs were mentioned in regards to herding. I came in, in the middle toward the end. This is when I mentioned reactionary vs non-reactive. I think the gsd dog in the 70s was a less reactive dog and more instinctive.
> 
> But since prot dog sports became a driving force for breeding, reactionary dogs are easy to stimulate for the decoy, some have become in such high drive that the thought process is only there with heavy compulsion; they are sport specialists that are easily be bridged into police work. Drive, drive, drive....focus it, mould it, and points for it. Makes for a high percentage of successful pups in a litter for sport/police providing the trainer has the talent.
> 
> I am not saying that people who herd sheep are not talented. As they are highly experienced and have great indepth knowledge of stock and dogs. They just let the dogs do the preponderance of the work instead of breaking it down into incremental training pieces.
> 
> Right dog for the right job.


Melody,

I know that Sara gives the impression that they walk out of the womb managing the farm or sheep station, but they don't. If you read all her posts, you can tell she did some training even with all that instinctive cast, trained other aspects and is still training and molding her dogs. Sara talks more about the dog she would like to have and that others have than her actual dogs. Her posts give the impression that the ideal BC and Kelpie don't require training and refinement in the work. I certainly haven't heard or read that from folks in her part of the world. Every agrarian region in the world selected for traits in the dogs that were useful for the type of work that they did. That's why we have the different breeds. The Australian/Kelpie/BC is ONE herding context/culture. They actually experimented with the collie like traits in Germany and they were useless. My friend's Kelpie decided she needed more distance on the flock and went straight through a board fence. Wow, what cast--but short on sense. Broke her leg. Great for hundreds of miles of open land. Not so with smaller fenced acreage. We mould and TRAIN instinctive traits to accomplish the job. The herding dog comes into his own between ages 3-5 with experience and training. I prefer that dog of the 70's--less reactive, instinctive. The focus on drive, drive, drive and prey reactivity will eventually render the dogs useless for the herding function. Its the focus on fight bite without selection for the other traits including trainability and I think in genetics once you select for that level of prey reactivity other traits disappear or reduce. We also have a sport function and I guarantee you that there is as much trainign that goes into that if not more than any protection sport. There is a lot of breaking it down into incremental pieces. I put at least three seasons [years] into training a dog for advanced level trial work or farm work. The dogs have instinct but I want it done a certain way and I define the job as the handler. They are trained to use their instinct to perform that job at hand. When I'm helping someone train a dog, I spend as much time tapping into his mental package and training in increments as any other dog sport trainer. I was working with a farmer to teach his dog to hold the sheep off the feed while he pours. This an australian shepherd. Hold off the feed is not an instinctive trait. Its more than a stay position. Done wrong, in this setting, me and his handler get slammed by hundreds of pounds of hungry ewes. There is a certain amount of instinct in my dogs that I can rely on but I put words on behavior and the dog understands context. He may have an instinctive gather or head, but I need him to hold pressure and maintain the line on the drive--training. Its easier if he has instinctive line but being strong on heading and gather, driving isn't usually instinctive. When you start this training, its in paw steps to build up to feet and then yards. When you watch Sara's BC for those few seconds starting to drive, he's not holding pressure, controlling the line. It will take training and more work for him to figure out that its not just a question of following behind when driving. There are instinctive line dogs. I have 130 sheep to sort by ear tag. I need him hold the group up to the gate and don't over pressure them while I single them through. Done wrong--I get slammed. If I moved my friend's flock from one pasture to another--there's a lake and a road. The flock includes lambs who don't know the routine. Dog has to work with the right pressure and at the right distance and do just the right flanks to avoid getting them into the lake and on the road when I move them through the one big gate. Those on command flanks are TRAINED. I might need him to flank OFF balance. That's against instinct and trained. That stop command is trained. I can also send him at further distances away from the flock. I can point to a single head of sheep and have him pressure or work that one only--disregarding the rest. This is training. I can tap into the dog's sense of the job and his guard instinct [my dogs] for a LOT of aspects of the work as well as his herding traits. His environmental soundness comes into play for things such as walled chutes; scale work; and other close contact work. There are tons of things that we need done that the dog may see as against instinct. This is where training and refinement comes into play. 

T


----------



## Melody Greba

Don Turnipseed said:


> I disagree with you Howard. While it is a matter of training, knowledgable folks, that make a living working stock on a dailey basis, let experienced dogs do "most" the teaching when it comes to the actual work. The owner is more of a director. That is what a good dog is bred for. An experienced dog is worth it's weight in gold as a teacher of young dogs.


A director is a good way of putting it. 

I think that I've been around too many people lately that have tried to make up by their dog's limitations than to replace the dog with one best suited for the work. 

It's not all about the training, if the dog can't hold up to his end of the deal and do his part; then he needs to be in a more suitable lifestyle than where he's at. 

I just embrace the knowledge and experience of the real herders for their selection and moulding their dog's instincts to real work, not just for points. I like the common sense of it.


----------



## rick smith

probably a stupid Q, but has the german shepherd grown too big to be an effective and nimble herding dog and become more of a guardian breed, if and where it is still used in this capacity around livestock ?
.....i never hear this breed mentioned much by all the knowledgeable people on here that are working stock


----------



## Sara Waters

Just a number of points.

Yes training is essential to give the dog context. My dogs are not perfect LOL and neither am I but there are some aspects of my dogs training that would be a lot easier if they already had the gentic trait for that instinct.

I am talking about the dog that good breeders strive to breed. The high calibre working dog with natural ability.

Tully Williams one of the best stockmen of our time with some amazing dogs sums it up and I will take the liberty of quoting from his book.

" The basic principle is that the dog should do everything by instinct in the most effective manner without much training at all" "You may hide faults with training in dogs kept for trial work or on small farms, but not in hard practical work and you cant hide the faults when breeding" Look for the old dog in the young pup"


----------



## Sara Waters

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> I was working with a farmer to teach his dog to hold the sheep off the feed while he pours. This an australian shepherd. Hold off the feed is not an instinctive trait. Its more than a stay position. Done wrong, in this setting, me and his handler get slammed by hundreds of pounds of hungry ewes. T


The instinct to hold should be there so you dont teach the hold just the word that indicates to the dog that is what you want it to do. When I am feeding I set up my BC and ask him to hold the sheep against the yard and he will. I havent actually taught him the mechanics of the hold because that is instinct. He moves naturally to ensure the the sheep stay where they are . That is where a dog with calm, minimal movement but good cover is very usefull. Mine is a bit too busy so I have to keep and eye on him to steady him.

Really for my stage of owning herding dogs I like to look at other peoples dogs and especially the good ones to find out what makes them good, is it natural ability, training etc. I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that natural ability is probably the most important feature especially when one has limited time to train as most farmers find themselves in that situation. I look at my own dogs and realise there are some things they lack and even intensive training is never going to make up for that. It may mask it to some degree but it often unravels in high pressure situations when you simply cant be in control, and that is where the right instincts win the day.

Tully talks about the old style dogs and how many of the modern day dogs are poor in comparison and how many people have never had the pleasure of working a really top dog so they have nothing for a comparison. I am interested in investigating what really makes a good dog in the Australian context. Things have become more mechanised and sheep have become less important and lots more people are looking on herding as a sport all which has probably led to this state of affairs.


----------



## Don Turnipseed

Don't worry about it Sara. There are working dogs that get the job done, rain or shine. May not have all the dance steps just so so in accordance with AKC events, but they get the job done. Then there are the AKC type herders that herd for points. Games are for points...points mean competition...competition means training the dance dance steps just so, so for the players. Working dogs work for the work, others need to be trained to to look pretty while doing the work with conditioned stock. Which you rather have working?


----------



## Bob Scott

rick smith said:


> probably a stupid Q, but has the german shepherd grown too big to be an effective and nimble herding dog and become more of a guardian breed, if and where it is still used in this capacity around livestock ?
> .....i never hear this breed mentioned much by all the knowledgeable people on here that are working stock


I started working my GDS in herding but life got in the way. My FIL was living with us and he had a bad 6-8 months before he passed this spring. 
Thunder had a natural gather to me and was really responding to the work when I stopped. T was my herding instructor. Now his age 8 and HD seem to be catching up with him a bit.
The GSD "style" of herding, HGH, is also completely different then the BCs. It's more of a containment type/boundry work with large herds of sheep. The East coast/West coast and Colorado seem to be about the only places you'll see that. 
For the most part AKC herding trials want to see a BC type of herding. They offer a HGH style of trialing but even that is not realistic to what it should be.
AHBA is trialing geard for more realistic farm type chores. That would have been my goal with Thunder.


----------



## Sara Waters

Don Turnipseed said:


> Don't worry about it Sara. There are working dogs that get the job done, rain or shine. May not have all the dance steps just so so in accordance with AKC events, but they get the job done. Then there are the AKC type herders that herd for points. Games are for points...points mean competition...competition means training the dance dance steps just so, so for the players. Working dogs work for the work, others need to be trained to to look pretty while doing the work with conditioned stock. Which you rather have working?


Don and anyone else who is remotely interested, this probably sums up best the way that my sentiments on working dogs are going and may give a better insight to how I feel than I can explain. This is where I want my next dog from.

http://campaspeworkingdogs.com/About.htm


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Sara Waters said:


> The instinct to hold should be there so you dont teach the hold just the word that indicates to the dog that is what you want it to do. When I am feeding I set up my BC and ask him to hold the sheep against the yard and he will. I havent actually taught him the mechanics of the hold because that is instinct. He moves naturally to ensure the the sheep stay where they are . That is where a dog with calm, minimal movement but good cover is very usefull. Mine is a bit too busy so I have to keep and eye on him to steady him.
> 
> Really for my stage of owning herding dogs I like to look at other peoples dogs and especially the good ones to find out what makes them good, is it natural ability, training etc. I am rapidly coming to the conclusion that natural ability is probably the most important feature especially when one has limited time to train as most farmers find themselves in that situation. I look at my own dogs and realise there are some things they lack and even intensive training is never going to make up for that. It may mask it to some degree but it often unravels in high pressure situations when you simply cant be in control, and that is where the right instincts win the day.
> 
> Tully talks about the old style dogs and how many of the modern day dogs are poor in comparison and how many people have never had the pleasure of working a really top dog so they have nothing for a comparison. I am interested in investigating what really makes a good dog in the Australian context. Things have become more mechanised and sheep have become less important and lots more people are looking on herding as a sport all which has probably led to this state of affairs.


So you just walked out one day and said hold and he knew what you meant. What kept him from doing something else instinctual. How did he know you wanted him to use the hold instinct. Tell me how that works per se. 

T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Sara Waters said:


> My understanding of the blind cast is that a dog that has inherited the blind cast will keep casting out untill it finds the sheep. It may cast out and stop and listen and scent and then cast out again. My dog does what you say - he tracks them and then casts, but according to a collie breeder this is not the true inherited searching cast. However the ability to use scent is also the hallmarks of a good dog and a good mustering dog may find sheep by tracking rather than casting out - it will track the sheep as my dog and your dog does and then cast out. My dog has tracked some lost sheep of mine 4 km away onto a neighbours property.
> 
> Then a good mustering dog will also have a casting break. It breaks out if it sees sheep further on, it always keeps on its side of the sheep and never crosses between sheep. They can also have the inherited ability to look for sheep, they will look left and right for sheep while casting and even if they see sheep they will still keep looking as they inherently understand that there could be more sheep and will often leave the sheep that they spot as they look for others.
> 
> .


 
How doe the true inherited "searching" cast work. HOW does the dog search? His nose? Sight. How does he know which direction to cast? Yes, the dog checks in and will further cast himself out. What makes him keep looking past the ones he's already located. Are you going by what you've done or what someone has told you? If he is not using sight or his nose, you set the stage for a dog that will willy nilly continue to cast himself to the end of the earth, regardless of whether there are sheep or not. 

Terrasita


----------



## Sara Waters

Terrasita Cuffie said:


> So you just walked out one day and said hold and he knew what you meant. What kept him from doing something else instinctual. How did he know you wanted him to use the hold instinct. Tell me how that works per se.
> 
> T


Before I introduced him to stock about 150 of my neighbours sheep got into my front paddock. I didnt know this and let him out the gate. He was 6 months old. He took one look and he was off. He cast out wide and was then holding them together tightly in a mob. Sheep tried to break but he was there, he is a big fast dog.

I ran to the nearest gate between my neighbour and me and he bought them to me and held them in the corner of the paddock as the gate was too tight for me to open. He held them there while I phoned the farmer to come and help me. He would have liked to have kept going once the sheep were through the gate -It wasnt easy to get him to stop working I can tell you, all his instincts were in overtime.

When training him I just put him into that situation several times each time I asked him to hold them and he did holding them in a corner, covering any that break. We practised it till I was satisfied he linked the command to what he was doing. I had to make sure that he backed off with "steady" and didnt force them through the fence, a really good dog would understand this by instinct and I have seen such dogs - A shearer friend has a brilliant young kelpie who was holding sheep calmly at a very young age.

Then I would ask him to walk up a command I put on the bringing to me action. I cant explain any better than that. Same with my ewes when I had to grab a lamb, he seemed to know to hold the ewe against the corner of the paddock while I grabbed her lamb.

With the searching cast I read about it and have witnessed it once with a farmer I was working with. He is interested in good dogs and we sometimes go to the top of a granite outcrop to test his young dogs out. The dog cast out, would stop (probably scenting or listening) then it would cast again. It did a series of casts untill it located the sheep. It didnt put its nose down and track.


----------



## Sara Waters

I am not saying that no training is required. I am interested in discovering ( by reading, watching DVDs and watching farmers dogs in action) more about the natural working abilities of top dogs. I see quite a lot of dogs given the industry I work in and see a huge range. I hear farmers who are my clients say they would love it if their dog had more force, or could cast etc. etc. My shearer friend has a brilliant young dog and has not required the same level of training as some dogs.

Very few farmers bother to really train their dogs in the way you T train your dogs for example, they also rely on the old dogs to train their young dogs to a certain extent. This is why they value dogs that dont need years of training because they dont have that to give.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

So Tully Williams a former trial trainer and farmer has decided to create his own strain of dogs based on an older line that has almost died out and won't let so called breed purity get in the way. He's telling you what the dog should do after he has created it selecting for certain traits. It all sounds good. He's against three sheep trials and yard trials. Not hard to imagine that if you selected for a dog for that job it would detract from what you need in other larger scale context. Many of the dogs in the pedigree have certain pros and cons both in the trial context and the farm/station context. There's lots of discussion of trialing and training. His beef is that the dogs are becoming watered down because the trials have been made easier--i.e. shorter cast distance, different obstacle width distances, etc. There is lots of discussion of training and even a joke or two about the dog that is a champion at home but not on the trial field. Part of the site is marketing and the other part is dedicated to discussing the lines of dogs and their individual working traits, their handlers, the preferred good old days of trialing and training. It does provide a certain context for those of us who have worked with Bob Vest and Vern Thorp--both of which have imported dogs from Australian and worked with their trainers. There is also a difference in how certain terms are used such as "hold, block, cover." Even amongst the old handlers who had the old good dogs there is a handler discussed who would go through a lot of dogs before he found one he liked. There is discussion of strong, yet hard headed dogs and how the push button trial dogs are now more favored which has weakened the dog. This sounds identical to my discussion of all this at the last AKC trial. But more importantly, natural dogs still required training, even if minimal in terms of putting commands on natural behaviors.

How many people know that a GSD or a corgi will blind cast and bring in sheep similar to a BC? If you have worked them outside of the trialing context, you might find it out. Don't set limits like corgis only drive or GSDs only tend. Von Stephanitz talks about the dogs that were sent to locate the sheep and bring them in. Some of this is based on conditioning. The handler sends the dog for the sheep. The dog has faith that they are out there somewhere and he will search for them. I found this out one day when my dog read my body language as sending her and took off on an outrun. There weren't any sheep in sight or smell that I knew. Luckily, I was able to stop her just as she hit the road. In her[Khaldi] mind, if I sent her, there were sheep somewhere. She just needed to find them. 

There are excerpts from Tully Williams' book on the net. He basically believes that there are few of the dogs of the 1920s quality around. Certain traits have become extinct. He hopes to revive them with his breeding. Williams discusses in his book certain reflexes or instincts---1) heading; 2) the complex instinct of mustering which is almost extinct--finding scattered sheep, putting them together and moving them to the desired location; 3) he should be able to hold his sheep together as a group and have balance and cover; 4) he should have force but not overdone; 5) cast/mustering; 6) driving; 7) calm steadiness--not too busy; and temperament and intelligence. Williams also states that you have to push the dog beyond his limits to know his capabilities. If you never worked a dog outside of a round pen or a 100 x 200 arena, you have no idea what his instincts or capabiltiies are. Its interesting that the book is really telling breeders that there is a dog of this ability and how to test for it. But at the same time he is marketing his dogs and saying that these almost extinct traits pretty much only exist with his strain of dogs. 

I really understand where Williams is coming from. Until you have worked a dog and seen the scope of his instincts, you won't have an appreciation of their capabilities. We're starting to see a lot of drive, but no stock sense or instinct for controlling livestock. Too many people are satisfied with training placement robotics for trials. Even the natural protection traits have gone by the wayside in favor of prey--fight---bite and points. 

T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Sara Waters said:


> Before I introduced him to stock about 150 of my neighbours sheep got into my front paddock. I didnt know this and let him out the gate. He was 6 months old. He took one look and he was off. He cast out wide and was then holding them together tightly in a mob. Sheep tried to break but he was there, he is a big fast dog.
> 
> I ran to the nearest gate between my neighbour and me and he bought them to me and held them in the corner of the paddock as the gate was too tight for me to open. He held them there while I phoned the farmer to come and help me. He would have liked to have kept going once the sheep were through the gate -It wasnt easy to get him to stop working I can tell you, all his instincts were in overtime.
> 
> When training him I just put him into that situation several times each time I asked him to hold them and he did holding them in a corner, covering any that break. We practised it till I was satisfied he linked the command to what he was doing. I had to make sure that he backed off with "steady" and didnt force them through the fence, a really good dog would understand this by instinct and I have seen such dogs - A shearer friend has a brilliant young kelpie who was holding sheep calmly at a very young age.
> 
> Then I would ask him to walk up a command I put on the bringing to me action. I cant explain any better than that. Same with my ewes when I had to grab a lamb, he seemed to know to hold the ewe against the corner of the paddock while I grabbed her lamb.
> 
> With the searching cast I read about it and have witnessed it once with a farmer I was working with. He is interested in good dogs and we sometimes go to the top of a granite outcrop to test his young dogs out. The dog cast out, would stop (probably scenting or listening) then it would cast again. It did a series of casts untill it located the sheep. It didnt put its nose down and track.


 
I knew there was a terms issue. Every dog I've instinct tested and selected for me did one or two things the first time on stock--held the group together to me or in a corner or along the fence. Corgis, GSDs, bouvier. I just picked two corgi puppies who did this at 9 and 10 weeks. A corgi puppy I bred would hold sheep on a fence and lie himself down at 10 weeks. What you call a hold, I call instinct to group and keep them grouped which involves balance and cover. People think track means to put the nose down to the ground--only in sport. When I say track--I mean use scenting ability. If they are using hearing, I can't tell. 

T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Sara Waters said:


> I am not saying that no training is required. I am interested in discovering ( by reading, watching DVDs and watching farmers dogs in action) more about the natural working abilities of top dogs. I see quite a lot of dogs given the industry I work in and see a huge range. I hear farmers who are my clients say they would love it if their dog had more force, or could cast etc. etc. My shearer friend has a brilliant young dog and has not required the same level of training as some dogs.
> 
> Very few farmers bother to really train their dogs in the way you T train your dogs for example, they also rely on the old dogs to train their young dogs to a certain extent. This is why they value dogs that dont need years of training because they dont have that to give.


 
We have those same farmers that are interested in sheep dog training that would make them more efficient. They have lots of dogs that were trained for certain contexts or with older dogs. They work solely on instinct. The trouble is what happen if the context changes? Or when the second or older dog dies and they are used to working as pairs. They don't have anything to fall back on. They are really intrigued when I tell them that they can train Susie the ACD to not only move the bull on command but not to run him into a fence and to call off. One guy asked me--you mean I can tell the dog to go left or right or stop? Back in the day at the training camps, half were farmers who wanted to have some sort of control of the instincts and get a better understanding of them. What's come into vogue here is farmers buying started dogs from trainers. They take that natural dog and put the commands on it and then show farmer Joe how to use his new tool. Its not pretty but will get the job done. A lot of farmers work with whatever the dogs give them and manage the rest themselves. They don't train because they don't know how. But when they find out how training can make them more efficient--its like a kid in a candy store. Williams knows what he is marketing---the dog you don't have to train--especially if you don't know how. Tully Williams talks about the age that certain instincts come into play. You will see the instincts at a certain age but at what age does the dog fully mature in his work. I see all the instincts as baby puppies. Of the breeds I've worked--the GSD has been the fastest maturing and my corgis are the slowest. Corgis are more visual and are more ideal for cattle. GSDs have high verbal intelligence. A lot of it has to do with me figuring out over the years what I want and learning to train/work with different types of dogs. I also train trial dogs. I'm really picky about a dog maturing before I trial it because of the mental stress of trialing---hence my 3 seasons. There's also the time to expose the dog to all sorts of work to know what you have genetically in instinct as well as training and handling. At some point you will come up with your preferred type for the work that you do--just as Williams has done and I have done. If you have a mature working dog--there is a tendency to put the pup aside and let him grow up. Dogs learn the chore aspect fairly quickly and early. Trial handling and conditioning takes extra time. 

Tully Williams is talking about a dog that Australia used to have and is almost extinct except for his breeding. He basically says that you as a country have weak dogs that require more training than they should. In the meantime, until you purchase one of his, he can give you tips on training what you have. You also elude to the same thing quoting your farmers. You all want this dream dog but don't have it and from what it sounds like---can't train it. So you either learn to train it or wait on the dream dog and until then, break out the ATV. Once again there are those preferences. I like a strong confident dog and for my personal dog, have no interest in having a weaker dog I have to build livestock confidence with. A dog that is just prey reactive with no stock sense--I wouldn't work or train for me personally. 

I love the instinctual keen dog as well. You have to work with them longer if you want them to be point trial dogs. However, they are awesome chore dogs. I'm not willing to give up my concept of the strong instinctual dog for the less keen and given to robotics ideal trial dog. In the U.S. we don't rely on as much open range work and there are more cattle than sheep. I think the last statistics quoted, there are more flocks under 100 head than over for the various sheep owners. There are large flocks and range work but smaller flocks dominate the total numbers. So the working jobs/contexts are different as they have been for centuries. Different dogs for different jobs.



T


----------



## Sara Waters

I think Tully indicates that there is a wide range of characteristics across all breeds of herding dogs. He obviously deals mainly with kelpies and BCs, or collies as he calls them. 

It is not then surprising that these traits should be found in other herding breeds and developed or lost by the workers and keeper of these breeds. I can see that.


He readily admits on his site that in the process of trying to develop the good dogs he is chasing he may use an outcross to an imported dog and it may take a couple of generations of ordinary pups and selection of the best to fix in place the good traits that he wants from that import to strengthen his own line of dogs. 

I guess I just like the knowledge, practical experience and effort that goes into his dogs. Good marketing maybe but he is well recognised as producing good dogs.

One of our local farmers bought a Williams dog and they are extremely happy with her. 

Interestingly enough my own BC has the Moorlands dogs (Hope and Don) - great great great grandparents in his heritage plus a few Cavanaghs(Teena and Tess), but well mixed with scottish imports and other lines of dogs.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

rick smith said:


> probably a stupid Q, but has the german shepherd grown too big to be an effective and nimble herding dog and become more of a guardian breed, if and where it is still used in this capacity around livestock ?
> .....i never hear this breed mentioned much by all the knowledgeable people on here that are working stock


My first love is a GSD. For me, above any other breed, that is the best breed to work with livestock. Bob's dog Thunder is right for a male size and instinct-wise. I've worked bitches that were 60-65 pounds and they had all the speed and agility they needed for covering sheep in 9 acres, working cattle, etc. I've tested dogs that didn't have the body for it--too big or too overangulated. Until I started herding, I probably wouldn't have said a male was too big. Now I do. I generally say no more than 80-85 pounds. With cattle, I think along the lines of the smaller the better. No roached or sway backs; good feet and pasterns; ideal balanced angles front to rear with a dog that is clean coming and going. The problem with GSDs is first and foremost, health.

T


----------



## Sara Waters

The farmers I deal with are mainly croppers, sheep in Australia are at an time low due to drought. Most of the big stations now use chppers for mustering cattle.

Farmers are often busy with what makes them the most money - crops, big cropping programs 6000hectares or more. A few farmers I know make the effort to train but most dont and as you said and make do with the dog they have and if it is lacking will use their motorbikes. I know farmers who run quite big flocks of sheep who dont use dogs.

I also know farmers who dont train their dogs particularly and those dogs are very good. Very few farmers in my state trial their dogs, only a handful really.

With my own dogs, I have made the decsion not to spend any more time on my kelpie (her breeder knew what she was likely to be) or koolie for sheep work. I concentrate on training them for agility at which they both do well.

With my BC I now have a pretty fair idea of what he genetically is and really it was obvious as a pup and by looking at his parents but I didnt know what I was looking at, although his breeder did warn me that he would be a handful. I always liked handful dogs as they make good agility dogs LOL. 

My training time with him is now spent in the context of working my sheep. There are certain elements of him that would be hard to train reliably as I now realise he lacks the genetics for calm and I have put quite a bit of effort in controlling his busyness. He does a good job for the most part and I put up with the not so good aspects by teaching him to get off the stock if he is crowding them. He has many of the pieces of the puzzle, but I would like to aim for a dog with the missing bits. 

Next dog I will be a lot more selective with. Most farmers rely on getting pups from neighbours, breeding their own, or paying money for started dogs. Not entirely satisfactory. I think the old ways of the stockman are passing into history and probably along with it the really good dog. I can see how it is happening just by looking at how agriculture is changing, we no longer ride on the sheeps back. We crop wheat and we mine minerals. We have big machinery and little time for livestock.


----------



## Sara Waters

I still dont understand the different dogs for different tasks. I understand that a different type of enterprise may need a different type of dog. So a cattle dog might be better on station cattle for example. 

For me one good dog is quite sufficient to work a couple of hundred head of sheep over a 1000 acres. They just need to muster and work through the yards. What else would I require? My BC it adequate in all tasks. I really only want to be bothered training up one good dog. I have just picked the best of my 3 although my koolie could be a good yard dog, so really is my BC who also has the advantage of working well in the paddock and a nice cast.


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Sara Waters said:


> The farmers I deal with are mainly croppers, sheep in Australia are at an time low due to drought. Most of the big stations now use chppers for mustering cattle.
> 
> Farmers are often busy with what makes them the most money - crops, big cropping programs 6000hectares or more. A few farmers I know make the effort to train but most dont and as you said and make do with the dog they have and if it is lacking will use their motorbikes. I know farmers who run quite big flocks of sheep who dont use dogs.
> 
> I also know farmers who dont train their dogs particularly and those dogs are very good. Very few farmers in my state trial their dogs, only a handful really.
> 
> With my own dogs, I have made the decsion not to spend any more time on my kelpie (her breeder knew what she was likely to be) or koolie for sheep work. I concentrate on training them for agility at which they both do well.
> 
> With my BC I now have a pretty fair idea of what he genetically is and really it was obvious as a pup and by looking at his parents but I didnt know what I was looking at, although his breeder did warn me that he would be a handful. I always liked handful dogs as they make good agility dogs LOL.
> 
> My training time with him is now spent in the context of working my sheep. There are certain elements of him that would be hard to train reliably as I now realise he lacks the genetics for calm and I have put quite a bit of effort in controlling his busyness. He does a good job for the most part and I put up with the not so good aspects by teaching him to get off the stock if he is crowding them. He has many of the pieces of the puzzle, but I would like to aim for a dog with the missing bits.
> 
> Next dog I will be a lot more selective with. Most farmers rely on getting pups from neighbours, breeding their own, or paying money for started dogs. Not entirely satisfactory. I think the old ways of the stockman are passing into history and probably along with it the really good dog. I can see how it is happening just by looking at how agriculture is changing, we no longer ride on the sheeps back. We crop wheat and we mine minerals. We have big machinery and little time for livestock.


Well, I wouldn't rule out certain things yet--he's young. I have found that there are turning points in terms of calm and partnership--Ages 3, 5, 8. Different things come at different ages and miles of experience. The Tully Williams site is a good one. A lot of the traits I discovered wouldn't have even occurred but for the dogs covering my mistakes. I'm going to hunt for a copy of the Cavanaugh and Williams books. I'm VERY interested in selection for working traits. Nowadys, there is so much emphasis on telling the dog what to do. Believe it or not, people LIKE the control aspects of commands and would rather have that than instinct. The looks on their faces when I say don't say anything, the dog is trying to figure it out or will figure it out. I'm not criticising what Williams is doing and I'm also not hung up on breed purity as long as you don't lose the traits the breed is known for. I don't want GSDs to become Mals. The Williams site is a very good read and pedigree reference--thanks.

The farmer culture of dogs is the same here and its been that way for over 100 years. They aren't going to spend tons of money for the fancy bred dog. They breed amongst their friends and acquaintances. If the dog works--great. If not, its a cull. Here, there is a lot of buying the started dog or sending the pup off for training in 30 day increments. They won't waste time learning to train or with training, but will pay for someone else to do it.

T


----------



## Terrasita Cuffie

Sara Waters said:


> I still dont understand the different dogs for different tasks. I understand that a different type of enterprise may need a different type of dog. So a cattle dog might be better on station cattle for example.
> 
> For me one good dog is quite sufficient to work a couple of hundred head of sheep over a 1000 acres. They just need to muster and work through the yards. What else would I require? My BC it adequate in all tasks. I really only want to be bothered training up one good dog. I have just picked the best of my 3 although my koolie could be a good yard dog, so really is my BC who also has the advantage of working well in the paddock and a nice cast.


Some dogs have instinctive guard and tending. I don't see or hear about these traits in BCs. Beardies would flush them out of hiding--huntaway. The first ISDS registered dog actually was a Beardie. There's also the dog off stock. Dogs bred and selected for cattle are different than their sheep counterparts. How is the dog off stock; as a house dog; social situations; with children; etc. All of that can influence which breed you choose. You may have a BC that is huge on cast yet will come into the pressure but many don't. The dogs I developed to what I call advanced work--could do it all within the small farm context with three types of farm stock--sheep, fairly tame cattle and poultry. But there are differences. Teva-GSD was great with lambs--all finesse and calm and instinctual rate, even with the psycho ones at a very young age. Rory-PWC matured into that at a later age. Rory was better out in the pasture earlier on. Teva came to that later. Asta-GSD--I trained very little. She was a dog that just did it and had the scope for all of it. These three were my best and brightest. There have been others but they set the standard for certain things--especially Rory and Asta. But often I'll say, there are things I trained and things I didn't. I was just able to understand what they were doing and put words to them. But the situation had to happen for me to see it. Having worked different types I now have a feel for what I like, what I don't. You only see one context--your own. Having studied the different breed histories and the regional history for GSDs I can appreciate how and why the dogs differed historically depending on the job. If farmer Joe didn't need cast for his herding job, I'm sure he didn't worry about whether the dog had it. Does the dog have the range of character to be all he can be with the livestock a a pet for the family children? Does he work his livestock adn also control the varmit population. In the common lands does he keep his stock in and others out? Does he guard the flock and the purse while the shepherd isin the tavern? Read the Williams site and you will see the range in the BCs. Williams just thinks he can combine them all in one dog. That hasn't always been the case except for a few touted greats. Setting traits in a line takes a lot of breeding and culling. It can be a life time project. For some it may be easier to just pick two dogs.

T


----------



## Sara Waters

No Borders would be hopeless at tending and guarding so if that was required to keep off wild dogs, Maremmas (sp?)are on the rise. They would also be useless at varmit control.

However in my context they are very good. There are actually some good utitlity dogs still around and when you have one you tend to use it. Farmers generally have just one of 2 dogs and are notorious for getting rid of them if they dont shape up. There are also still breeders around in my state who look carefully at what they are breeding for and will try and combine the appropriate traits. Yes some farmers deal with what they have and sometimes have no choice in having a paddock dog or motorbike plus a yard dog. I mean what happens if your yard dog is sick or lost to a snake?

However the good utility dogs exist and many of our Borders are quite strong on coming in under pressure. I havent experienced too many that are not, not within the lines my dog is from anyway.

Certainly if a cast is not required you wouldnt bother, but most farmers with rough country want it.

I think that again in my context where an allrounder is very applicable, if as a breeder you give in to the notion that you will only breed yard dogs, or only breed paddock dogs you are probably doing the collie/kelpie breed a disservice. If there was only a need for a yard dog which one day may be the way of things then sure breed a top notch yard dog. However I like that Tully is trying to preserve what could be an extremely useful dog, a dog that can do all the jobs in the broadacre sheep farm if called upon to do so. They do exist even outside Tullys lines and are worth their weight in gold.


----------



## Sara Waters

The other interesting thing with the Border is that some breeders are breeding them to work specifically cattle. One Northern cattleman told a friend of mine that he has ditched his other breeds and found the BC bred for cattle to be the best. I havent personally seen a BC working station type cattle just photos and they were full on. I think many breeds are adaptable and the certainly the BC appears to be. I was never particularly fond of BCs but they appear to be a pretty adaptable dog in the right hands.


----------



## Nezagren

Howard Gaines III said:


> Poker...it's how well you play the hand.
> IF the dog can make the person or helper think they are "bad" it's game over!
> 
> No Borders would be hopeless at tending and guarding so if that was required to keep off wild dogs, Maremmas (sp?)are on the rise. They would also be useless at varmit control.
> 
> However in my context they are very good. There are actually some good utitlity dogs still around and when you have one you tend to use it. Farmers generally have just one of 2 dogs and are notorious for getting rid of them if they dont shape up. There are also still breeders around in my state who look carefully at what they are breeding for and will try and combine the appropriate traits. Yes some farmers deal with what they have and sometimes have no choice in having a paddock dog or motorbike plus a yard dog. I mean what happens if your yard dog is sick or lost to a snake?
> 
> However the good utility dogs exist and many of our Borders are quite strong on coming in under pressure. I havent experienced too many that are not, not within the lines my dog is from anyway.
> 
> Certainly if a cast is not required you wouldnt bother, but most farmers with rough country want it.
> 
> I think that again in my context where an allrounder is very applicable, if as a breeder you give in to the notion that you will only breed yard dogs, or only breed paddock dogs you are probably doing the collie/kelpie breed a disservice. If there was only a need for a yard dog which one day may be the way of things then sure breed a top notch yard dog. However I like that Tully is trying to preserve what could be an extremely useful dog, a dog that can do all the jobs in the broadacre sheep farm if called upon to do so. They do exist even outside Tullys lines and are worth their weight in gold.
> Path: https://swcpoker.club/flop-games/big-o


True you have to play with your dog. Its like having fun and gambling with your friends


----------

