Article on Protection drives..

Helmut Raiser's View on Which Drives Are Useful During Protection Training
by Armin Winkler
Prey-drive, defense-drive, fighting-drive, etc. are the catch phrases of modern protection training. They are thrown around at every seminar we attend, they are the subjects of countless articles, but rarely do people agree on what is being said about these "drives." About 20 years ago Helmut Raiser revolutionized Schutzhund protection training by identifying which inborn motivations (drives) are stimulated in the different phases of training. He did not just assign specific names to these motivations, he combined years of practical experience and research with the clinical studies and their results of such behaviourial giants like Brunner, Hediger, Lorenz, Most, and Trummler among others, to determine on a scientific level what drives are and how they fit into protection training. Without any further introduction, let me summarize his findings from his now famous book Der Schutzhund.

Prey Drive

Prey drive is part of a dog's food gathering behaviour. In a predatory animal that means prey drive governs hunting and killing techniques. Chasing, flushing, pouncing, biting, and shaking-to-death, are the most important of these techniques when we are talking about protection training. In order to stimulate these instinctive techniques in the dog, we have to keep in mind what a real prey animal does when it is hunted. Prey is always on the move, it always moves in an evasive fashion, and it is panic-stricken. These behaviours in turn trigger pursuit, pouncing, biting, pulling, and shaking-to-death in the dog. Prey drive is inborn, and is a trainable instinct, meaning it can be enhanced or reduced. Prey drive can be exhausted, meaning that a time will come when the dog "doesn't feel like performing the desired behaviours any more." Author's note: Considering the serious effects the end result of this drive would have on a prey animal, I do not subscribe to the idea that prey work is only a silly game.

Defense Drive

Defense drive counts as one of the dog's aggression behaviours, and it can appear in conjunction with other behaviours. Threatening, staring, and biting are typical defensive reactions. Defense behaviour is generally triggered by threats, real or perceived, or open aggression. The goal of defense behaviour is always to create avoidance behaviour in the threatener. Defense drive may appear as defense of prey, defense of puppies, defense of territory, defense against the unfamiliar, or self-defense. The drive is satisfied in each case when the aggressor shows avoidance behaviour. Defense drive is not subject to exhaustion, so it can be activated at will. It should, therefore, be part of the combative behaviour of any protection dog. Furthermore, it is responsible for behaviours like countering when under stress or when threatened. The great danger when working a dog in defense drive is that the same stimuli which cause defense behaviour also cause avoidance behaviour. Which of the two possible behaviours is displayed by a dog when a trigger stimulus is presented is dependant on a variety of factors, among them confidence and temperament of the dog as well as the threatener, "life" experiences of the dog, age and maturity of the dog, location (unfamiliar or home turf), distance between adversaries, and the presence of other external influences (prey, mate, puppies). Author's note: Hopefully this allows people to see defense for the double-edged sword it is. Defense is one part of protection training. The idea that good dogs should only be worked in defense is a dangerous one which has wrecked many great dogs.

Aggression Drive

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

Aggression is learned.
Aggression is created by negative experiences.
Aggression is inborn.

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

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

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

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

Fighting Drive

Again the question of whether or not an independent fighting drive exists has not yet been answered. Some dog-experts feel that a fighting drive must exist and that it is related to the play drive. The term fighting drive is an oxymoron. It combines the word drive refers to an inherited trait which serves to preserve life and species, with the word fight which refers to physical combat. A drive to fight would then be an internal motivation which leads the animal into a potentially harmful situation. But even in social aggression the non-physical ritualistic showdowns are much more common than the injurious physical fights. However, that argument aside, the term fighting drive is a useful description of a desirable behaviour in the dog. We want to see a dog who has fun fighting with the helper. But only a dog who doesn't feel like he is fighting for his life can be unstressed and have fun. Therefore I (Raiser) feel that fighting drive is an extension of prey drive.

What qualities make up good fighting drive - meaning the spontaneity? Practical experience has shown that dogs who work primarily in as a result of their defensive drive may still lack fighting drive. Dogs like that then often fail to engage the helper if he does not present any defensive stimuli, but work confidently while under threat. The desire to "seek the fight" is an essential ingredient of fighting drive. In all dogs with pronounced fighting drive, I also found pronounced prey drive. Making prey is a passionate activity which does not stress the dog. However, prey drive alone is not equal to fighting drive, the dog also has to use defense behaviour. The fundamental component of fighting drive is the active part of the aggressive drive, social aggression. Therefore, the dog must always see the helper as a rival. The object of competition could vary: it could be the prey (hence the relation to prey drive); or it could be social rank, which works well with dominant dogs. So in order to increase fighting drive, we have to promote prey drive, build up defense drive, and strengthen aggression by teaching the dog that he can defeat and dominate the helper. This should make it very clear that as much as fighting drive is a very desirable quality, one cannot expect to see it fully developed in a one year old dog.

Author's note: Do your dogs a favour and help them develop all the components that make up good fighting drive, rather than waiting until it magically appears out of thin air because the dog should have "it" naturally.

What impresses me about the discussion of drives every time I read Helmut Raiser's book is that he simply dissects the material on a scientific basis. He does not try to make the theory fit his practical techniques, on the contrary he willingly admits to his own past mistakes, and tries to improve his practical skill by better understanding the theory behind it. I will probably summarize the practical applications of these theories at some time in the future. For people who can't wait, the full length version is available in my translation of the book Der Schutzhund.

What is it called when the decoy raises the batton and the dog releases the bite...lol oh yeah point and shoot.

I love Armin Winkler! He is spot on when it comes to protection training!
Plus he is also well versed in ABs...he's based out of Virgina and has a few ABs in his club. I've heard he's a real down to earth guy as well as being easy to talk to.

Most all bite work training starts with prey drive and grip development.

Prey Drive Promotion Part I

by Armin Winkler

Following my article in the Nov/Dec issue I was asked to continue discussing the drives used in protection training in short articles. I will use my translation of Helmut Raiser's book Der Schutzhund as a reference in my discussion.

Let's begin practical training for protection work where it should begin: with prey-drive promotion. Let me briefly explain why I chose the word "promotion" over the word "development" to translate the German term "Förderung", which could be translated either way. To me the term development refers to a process which takes place on its own. Drives develop naturally through maturation to a certain degree. As trainers we should try to give nature a helping hand by promoting what is already there, and therefore actively enhance a particular drive to its maximum potential.

I like to start prey work as early as possible with puppies, usually around ten to twelve weeks old. This allows me to work with all the unspoiled inborn instincts of the dog. I start young puppies the same way I start late starting adults, with a rag or a sack. The most important thing for the helper to understand during this early work is that the sack is the prey, not the helper. Therefore, the quick, sporadic, and unpredictable movements of the sack are what pique the dog's interest and consequently stimulate the dog's prey drive. As Raiser writes in his book: "If one tries to promote prey drive, then all the dog's focus should be on the prey, meaning it is the prey that does all the moving around, not the helper." One of the reasons for starting with a sack is that it is relatively easy to shake it and wiggle it and let it fly around, and therefore get all the dog's attention on the sack. Another is that it is much easier to bite for beginners whether they are puppies or late starting adults. Now that we have the basic idea of what the crucial elements of start up work are, lets see what typical training exercise should look like.

The dog is on leash, the handler encourages the dog calmly, without distracting him from focusing on the prey. The helper makes the rag come alive by moving and wiggling it sporadically. This moving rag triggers the dog's prey drive. The helper will see first the dog's eyes following that little creature, then his body will follow slightly pouncing after the elusive prey, finally the dog will start to snap after it in an attempt to catch it and make prey. When the dog appears almost hypnotized by the rag and the tension waiting for just the right moment is written all over the dog's body, that is when the helper moves the rag to within the dog's reach, and snap, the dog bites into the rag. As soon as he does the prey is his. He wins his rag, and the handler should praise him in a proud tone (but not to the point where the dog forgets about his prey). Initially I let the dog have his way with his prey for a bit, but then I want to make it clear to him that it is indeed a prize worth keeping. I use two methods to accomplish this. One, I have a string on the rag which I keep in my hand even after the dog wins the rag. And just when the dog starts loosing interest in the seemingly lifeless prey and he loosens his grip or drops the rag on the ground, I revive the rag by pulling on the string. The dog will either feel the tension in the rag and firm up his grip, or it will slip away from him and the prey stimulation starts again. After a couple of these "losses", or near "losses", the dog will hold on to the prey quite firmly, not wanting to take the chance to let it slip away again. As soon as he shows this kind of commitment the dog should be allowed to carry his prey off the field.

The second method I use is pretty close to what Raiser describes as "challenging" in his book. Again this work starts after the dog has won his prey but then either holds it loosely in his mouth or he puts it down on the ground in front of him. This time I try to show the dog that he is not the only one interested in his prey. The helper also has his eye on that prize, and this already describes a large part of the exercise. The helper starts challenging the dog for the rag, by cautiously reaching for a corner of the rag, then quickly pulling his hand back, only to reach for it again from a different angle. If the rag is still in the dog's mouth, a slight tug might help to make it clear to the dog that the helper's intention is to steal his rag. A lot of dogs will at that point show a pulling away of the prey, or a confident re-grip on the prey with a dirty look, or a slight growl and then a re-grip on the prey. All these behaviors lead to a confident holding of the prey, which should be rewarded by letting the dog carry the prey off the field. In dogs with good balance in all drives both methods work well and we should probably use both to keep the work interesting for the dog. If prey drive is the dog's strongest motivation, then the first method will lead to quicker results. The second method works nicely on dogs who are very possessive and who show defense of prey behavior easily. As Raiser writes: "...the challenging is already the first stimulation of defense behavior..."

The next step in training should be to make sure that the dog holds his prey (the rag) hard enough on his initial bite. This is done by simply not letting the dog win the prey on his initial snap, but instead holding on to the rag a bit longer with a bit of tension on it. So that if the dog snaps at the rag, but then eases his grip, he will lose the prey which should then immediately begin to move and wiggle again. Prey drive is once again stimulated by this movement and the dog gets another opportunity to bite the rag. The goal is not to try and rip the prey out of the dog's mouth, but to challenge the dog enough to make him bite progressively harder.

This work should progress to where the dog has to jump to reach the rag and make prey. I accomplish this by simply holding the rolled-up rag high enough, at the moment the dog gets the opportunity to bite it so the dog has to jump to reach it. With adolescent dogs or late started adults this means chest or belly height, with talented puppies I usually hold it just high enough to make them do a little hop which gets their front paws off the ground. The principle is the same, jump and bite to make prey. This is a foundation technique which a dog will use throughout his protection work career.

The step I chose as the next training progression jumps the queue a bit in the sequence Raiser outlines in his book. However it still follows one of his most fundamental principles: "It is not the helper who dictates the action, but the dog. During drive promotion work one has to accomplish that the dog stimulates the helper, not the helper the dog." My choice as the next skill the dog should learn is to flush the prey by barking. The previous training steps should have created a bit of an obsession in the dog for chasing and biting the prey (rag). As before I start by stimulating the dog's prey drive with the wiggly rag, I may even let the dog snap at it and miss once. Then when I have the dog primed for this activity, I create a bit of frustration by suddenly stopping all action and movement. The helper stands still looking off into the distance, the rag hanging in his hand lifeless. Most dogs whine just a bit, then they let out a frustration yelp. It is this yelp which causes the rag to fly up like a bird flushed from a bush, and the dog gets to make prey. It won't take long until these initial yelps turn into demanding barks which sound purposeful and pushy; their goal, to get the action started again. So, the dog learns early on that he has some control over what happens on the field, and that barking is the way to make things happen. The reason I incorporate this exercise this early into training is to avoid letting the dog get so pre-occupied with biting during protection work that nothing else matters to him any more.

The next training stage in my program is usually the strike or attack. And once again my program deviates slightly from Dr. Raiser's. He lists the transfer from the rag or tug to the sleeve before the teaching of the strike. I follow the same sequence when training talented late started adult dogs. However, when training puppies and young dogs I like to teach an early form of the striking technique first. When the dog has mastered the hard initial bite and the jump and bite to make prey exercises, I start teaching the striking technique. The handler holds the dog by the collar, the helper stimulates the dog in prey drive, first very close to the dog, he can even let him snap and miss once. Then he distances himself from the handler and dog, while still simulating the dog. He goes to a distance of about three to four meters initially. He continues to wiggle the rolled up rag or puppy tug to entice the dog. On a pre-arranged signal by the helper, the handler releases the dog. The helper stands slightly sideways to the dog, when the dog reaches the jumping distance, the helper pulls the rag upwards and slightly sideways, "remember prey always moves away from the dog" (Raiser). This last second movement should prompt the dog to pounce quickly to prevent the getaway of the prey. The helper should gently absorb the dog's impact in the rag and set the dog on his feet. Then the prey is released, the dog is leashed up, and the dog gets to carry the prey off the field. I have found that puppies and young dogs have no hang-ups about hopping up on strangers from any angle. Therefore, they learn a nice striking technique into the helper very easily and early on. Sometimes dogs can't bite a sleeve yet because they are too small, or because they have to undergo defense drive promotion before they bite hard enough to handle a sleeve. I have learned from experience that "missing the boat" when it comes to teaching a technique when the time is right can lead to a lot of "what might have been" discussions later on. Don't misunderstand me I do not mean to imply that I know as much or more than Dr. Raiser, I simply have developed a preferred program sequence over the years.

This brings me to the end of this article, since there are limits to how long these things can go on. The follow-up article, discussing the transfer to the sleeve, teaching the dog to fight, shifting into prey drive from the control phase, and the pro's and con's of prey work, is already in the works. I hope to get your attention again in the next article.




Prey Drive Promotion Part II

by Armin Winkler

As promised, here is the second part of my article on prey drive promotion. Naturally, I won't start at the beginning of prey drive training again. I am going to make the assumption that the reader has read part one of this article in order to continue my discussion. There are several exercises that I personally feel should be started during prey drive promotion training, these exercises are going to be the focus of this article.


Like everybody else who has been involved with dogs for a while, I am certainly aware that training does not always follow the steps outlined in books or videos. But if we are involved in the training of a dog with solid prey drive, and we followed the steps I outlined in the last article, then we can assume that the dog has a firm handle on the following techniques:


•He bites a rag firmly and holds onto it.
•He keeps the rag in his mouth and carries it for short stretches.
•He can jump up and bite a rag in one motion.
•He barks at the motionless helper to create action.
•He runs towards the helper then jumps and bites to make prey.


Assuming that the dog we are training is "with the program," so to speak, the transfer onto the sleeve is a very good choice as the next training step. Whether we go to a puppy arm, an intermediate sleeve, or a full size arm really depends on the age, size, and talent of the dog. The type of sleeve used really does not matter, the training pretty much looks the same.

The first step in achieving the transfer to the sleeve is to make the dog accept the sleeve as his new prey object, in other words he has to view the sleeve the same way he has viewed the sack or rag up to now. I prefer to start by swinging and wiggling the sleeve around in front of the dog, just out of his reach, from time to time I also throw it past him just short of where he can grab it.

I have found better success when I start with the sleeve not on my arm in the beginning for two reasons:


•I can move the sleeve more freely and therefore stimulate the dog stronger.
•I have found that some dogs have no hesitation biting an object in the beginning, but they act hesitant when biting "a part of the helper."


In the initial phases of this training we should take great care to remove all hesitation or inhibition in the dog to allow his drives to come out as strongly as possible.

A word of caution for this stage in training. As helpers we have to realize that the sleeve is much more a part of us than the sack ever was. We have to be very aware of this and remember Dr. Raiser's words: "If one tries to promote prey drive, then all the dog's focus should be on the prey, meaning that it is the prey that does all the moving around, not the helper. Furthermore, the prey never moves towards the dog, but always away from, even after it is grabbed." Why do I make such a big deal about this you ask? The answer is simple, it is a big deal.

As we try to move the sleeve in a wild and sporadic manner we also move around a lot and it is very easy to move in a way which is viewed as confrontational by the dog. Which in turn is totally counterproductive to prey work. Another very common problem in this stage of training is that the sleeve is moved towards the dog, sometimes quite forcefully. Very few things annoy me more when I work a dog than seeing a young dog get out of the way of the sleeve to avoid being hit with it, or to avoid having it rammed down his throat. "Prey always moves away from the dog." This applies to the sleeve as much as it did for the rag.

Now that I am done preaching, let me describe what the work should look like. As already described above, the dog's prey drive is stimulated by the moving sleeve, he keeps reaching and snapping at it but so far in vain. Now it is time to give the dog an opportunity to bite, for this the sleeve can be held by opposite ends, or it can be worn on the helper's arm. The helper passes by the dog laterally (not towards him) and presents the sleeve.

Several points to consider:


•The dog needs to be allowed a good opportunity to bite the sleeve.
•The dog may be a bit unsure by the feel of the new prey, so he should win it right away, even if the bite is a bit weak.
•This is a teaching exercise, so we want to show the dog where on the sleeve we want him to bite, by only allowing him to bite the correct area on the sleeve.


As soon as the dog has won the sleeve we work on getting him to hold on to it. The same two methods work I described for sack work, have rope or leash on the sleeve to tug on it when the dog wants to let it go, or challenge the dog for his prey right away. I follow the same training steps as with a sack to get the dog to hold his initial grip on the sleeve. As with the sack, the sleeve will then be presented progressively higher until the dog again has to jump and bite to make prey. Remember, there is no rush to put a dog on a sleeve.


At this point I feel it is necessary to briefly talk about the strike or attack exercise again. As I described in my last article, I start this exercise with a sack already if I can, to teach the dog targeting technique and to lower inhibitions in the dog when it comes to biting prey on a helper who is facing the dog. Those two points are very important, and present us with new problems when we are working with a sleeve. The dog has to target more accurately to get a good bite on the sleeve. The helper has to be very careful to catch the dog softly, so the dog does not hurt his mouth on the sleeve. And, the sleeve is much closer to the helper's body, so the frontal picture is much more ominous for the dog.

Raiser describes that he starts this exercise by moving laterally to the stimulated dog, then the dog is released when the helper gives the signal. Initially the dog gets a shot at the helper and sleeve more from the side than frontally. Gradually the dog gets more and more of a frontal view when he makes prey, until he attacks straight into the helper with the sleeve horizontally across the helper's chest. During all these bites it is always important that the helper compensates for any problems the dog may have, and that he always absorbs the dog's impact softly.

I teach this exercise very similar in principle, but somewhat different technically. Let me describe it briefly. The dog, who is held by the collar, is stimulated by the helper in prey, the sleeve moves a lot, and I usually let the dog snap and miss a couple of times. Then I move away from the dog, always making sure that his eyes are fixated on the sleeve (remember, we are working the dog in prey at this stage), by wiggling it. In the beginning I don't move more than about 5-10 meters away from handler and dog. When I have reached my catching spot, I bend over wiggling the sleeve around just above the ground. When the dog is nicely pumped up, I give the handler the signal (something pre-arranged) to let him go. The dog charges at the frantically wiggling sleeve, when the dog comes to within a distance where he is setting up to target and then leap, I stand up and pull the sleeve up with me to a height I think the dog can easily reach. This last minute "escape" manoeuver by the prey (sleeve) prompts the dog to follow the movement of the sleeve. The dog will leap upwards and forwards to catch the sleeve which moves upwards and backwards (prey moves away from dog). Contact should be timed so it occurs when the sleeve is in the position it normally is in when a helper performs any frontal trial exercise. The impact from the dog has to be absorbed by the helper, who then goes on to set the dog onto the ground. In the beginning the dog will win the sleeve at that moment. I feel that this method brings great success with dogs who do not naturally strike hard. The dog strikes the helper frontally right from the start without realizing it because he should be completely mesmerized by the last second movement of the sleeve. As I said in the beginning the principle, making the exercise about the prey, is the same it is just executed a bit differently. A word of caution regarding this method, it takes good timing on the part of the helper. I would recommend that helpers practise this manoeuver with experienced dogs who already strike well, before they experiment around with dogs who are just learning.

The next skill the dog should learn during prey drive promotion is the active counter. In his book Dr. Raiser titles this chapter "Teaching the Dog to Fight." Let me take a moment to remind the readers that none of the described exercises have to occur exactly in the sequence I am outlining them. I sometimes teach the countering much earlier in training if the dog allows it. However, I do believe that biting a sleeve, striking, and countering are techniques a dog must master before trial exercises are put together. Now back to countering. What is countering? Let me give you my definition. Countering is any type of assertive behavior on the part of the dog when he feels adversity (stress) during a bite-exercise. The most common forms are forceful tugging, growling, re-gripping, and shaking. Dr. Raiser concentrates pretty much on the "Shaking Prey to Death" behavior in his book. My preferred reaction is the re-gripping behavior, because I feel it has the most benefits for the dog, especially in his sport career. For the purpose of this discussion, I will use the term countering.

Teaching countering depends very much on the dog, we have to tailor our training to the individual dog. To quote Dr. Raiser: "In dogs with very strong drives and in some insecure dogs it is relatively easy to provoke the "shaking-to-death" behavior. In other dogs that might not be possible until the are 15 months or older or until the have undergone heavy defensive drive promotion." For that reason I believe very strongly that we should keep the teaching of this technique in mind at every stage of training so that we do not miss an opportunity. We have to recognize countering behavior for what it is and reward it whenever it occurs, even if we are working on another exercise.

Let me describe how I teach countering. The dog gets a bite on leash. While the dog is holding on the handler should hold the leash tight, the helper should keep the bite object (sleeve or rag) calm and steady. The helper should also not be confrontational with the dog, meaning he should keep the dog behind him a bit. Now remember, it is adversity which provokes the dog to counter. So, we have to create adversity in very small doses. We flex our sleeve arm, as if the prey animal has found new strength. We can cover the dog's eyes with our hand. We can face the dog more frontally. We can tickle his throat. We can lift the dog up a bit. We can rub the dog with a stick. We can drag him towards a foreign object. We can blow in his face. The possibilities are really endless, as long as we always keep in mind that it is always better to create too little adversity than too much. The adversity is designed to cause the dog a bit of stress and make him feel slightly insecure. Immediately following the stress, should be a moment when the stress causing factor lets up a bit. The dog will perceive this as if the adversary is experiencing a moment of weakness. Dogs with normal drives and instincts will take this moment of weakness to assert themselves, and this assertion is our counter.

What we have to realize is that it is stress which triggers the counter. We may cause the dog stress unintentionally any time during training, so if the dog counters at any point in early training, we have to let him win. We can do this by stripping the sleeve, or by relaxing and giving up momentarily before we continue with what we were doing. We have to really feel out a dog to see what method of triggering the counter is best so that we do not create grip problems. In the beginning I reward any countering behavior so I will not create insecurities in the dog ( Raiser: "unaffected tolerance of aggression causes insecurity"). However, as the dogs confidence and skill repertoire grows, I become more choosy as to which counters I reward, and which ones I do not. For example, a dog with a very shallow grip who shakes violently will not reach his goal from me for very long, I will wait for a re-grip before I will reinforce his counter.

In general I would say that I only reward the shake, growl, or tug as a counter in the very beginning of training and later only with dogs whose grips are very full and almost perfect. But once again I have to judge each situation as it happens, nothing is chiseled in stone. If the above method, which by the way is very similar to what Dr. Raiser describes in his book, does not lead to the desired countering behavior, then we probably have to wait until the dog is more mature, and defensive drive promotion has begun.

Before I wrap up prey drive promotion, I want to discuss one more exercise, which I consider imperative for prey drive work. That exercise is exploding into drive from the control phase. For this I need a dog advanced enough in training that he bites a sleeve (or at least a puppy-sleeve) and preferably already counters (preferable, but not absolutely necessary). One very common but also huge problem I encounter all the time is that very competent dogs suffer tremendously from handler influence (however mild it may be). A dog's drives are inhibited by obedience, after all, obedience teaches the dog that the handler decides when he can and when he cannot follow his instincts. It is only natural then that after obedience during bitework the dog's biting performance may suffer. Let me anticipate some criticism here. Has this guy never heard of drive capping? Of course I have, and for the readers who have not, drive capping refers to harnessing or collecting drive through obedience. Unfortunately, it takes a master to make that technique work well, and not all of us, myself included, are masters at it. The exercise I am about to describe in a way serves the same purpose, only that the dog learns to do it himself, rather than the handler doing it for him.

The way I start this exercise is to set a dog up like in the SchH II and III escape. In other words, I get the handler to make his dog lie down, holding him by the collar. I stand sideways to the dog the sleeve facing the dog. The agreement is the handler releases the dog as soon as I take a step. I then perform a run away. The dog should follow and bite the sleeve. As soon as he has a firm grip I will strip the sleeve, the dog gets to make prey. Initially I find that the dog's grip may not be as convincing as it is during the exercises with heavy stimulation. The dog may even act a bit half hearted, after all, first he has to be obedient by lying down, then he has to be dis-obedient by breaking the down. And still he has to muster enough drive to catch the helper and bite the sleeve. This exercise is harder on dogs than people realize, and I am sure every helper will agree with me that a lot of dogs show diminished bite performance in the beginning stages of this exercise. The exercise evolves to where the dog has to down off leash and stay put until the helper moves. This takes quite a bit of control. The next step is to make the dog heel around a bit, then down, then the escape. Next we have the dog heeling around with some sits for pauses, then when the dog shows nice collected heeling and sitting, the helper jerks the sleeve while the dog is in a sit, to allow him to come for a frontal strike. The attentive reader will recognize this as a very close approximation of the attack on handler exercise in SchH I. Finally, I have the handler heel around me and do one of the sitting pauses while behind me, then I will spin around and jerk the sleeve, to let the dog bite. The down before the SchH II and III escape, the heeling to the blind for the attack on handler in SchH I, and the rear transport in SchH II and III before the surprise attack, are huge handler pressure exercises in trials. Dogs who have learned how to explode into drive from an obedience phase will have fewer problems with these exercises. I deliberately teach this exercise during prey drive promotion, because I feel that dogs learn this exploding into drive easier while they still work purely in prey drive and not carry any extra baggage from the stresses of defensive drive work. Naturally, the amount of obedience has to be tempered to the dogs level of proficiency in obedience.

The goal of prey drive promotion has been reached when the dog has learned that the presence of a helper on the field means that the prized prey cannot be too far away, that he can incite the helper into action by barking and when he has mastered good gripping technique, fast, hard striking, countering, and exploding into drive from obedience. At that point, the field, the helper, and the sleeve have all become trigger stimuli for the dog's prey drive. If we were able to lay such a solid and strong foundation in protection work in prey drive we are well on the road to success on the sport field.

Of course, as wonderful as prey drive is, it is not without downsides. One of the biggest problems is that prey drive can be exhausted or fatigued. This means a point may come when the dog just does not feel like chasing or catching prey any more, Raiser calls this "Stimulus-and Action-Specific Exhaustion". When the dog's prey drive is exhausted training is over for that session. If exhaustion sets in very quickly, it becomes very difficult to make gains. Another problem with prey drive may be that the prey drive in a particular dog is not strong enough to even bite a sack competently. With dogs like that training is frustrating and no progress can be made working only in prey. I am not making these comments to cast a negative light on prey drive work, on the contrary, foundation work should always be based on prey drive. But I want to make it clear that training is not over by any means yet at the end of prey drive promotion. We still have to work with the dog's defensive drive, and then we have to work on channelling defense drive into prey drive, and how we can work on balancing the two drives. I hope to get the opportunity to discuss those exciting topics in future issues, as well as explaining some specific cynological (dog related sciences) terminology.


© Schutzhund Village 2003-2010

superfish v0.02





Getting a Grip

by Armin Winkler

At my seminars, I like to address specific training issues the dog handlers feel is their dogs' weakest point in protection. I would say that with the dogs who have already had some protection training, the single most mentioned problem is the issue of gripping technique. The most lamented concerns are a shallow bite and "munchy", hectic behavior on the sleeve. Most of the time the cause for this "deficiency" gets placed at the feet of the dog. And, while that may be the case in some instances, it is usually the least prominent cause for the problem. In order to address any problem in training, we need to first and foremost identify where it comes from in the first place.

With that said, I am again at a point where I have to explain a bit of my thinking, so that readers know where I come from. The first premise which needs to be set is this: full, calm, convincing grips are prey motivated. While defense drive gives us intensity and seriousness, and ultimately a harder bite, if the training is done right, it is an undeniable truth, that the bite we all want, full and hard and calm, as well as deep mouthed striking at every opportunity, comes from prey, and prey only.

So, where then do the grip problems come from? Well, first have to rule out any kind of physical causes, such as bad teeth, sore jaws, neck problems, etc.. In few cases, they cause the dog to not bite properly.

Once health issues are ruled out, we can start trying to find out what is causing the grip problem. With very few exceptions, grip problems result from the fact that the dog is wrestling with a conflict, which interferes with his ability to deal with his prey (sleeve) in a clear and unbothered fashion.

The most common cause for conflict for the dog during protection work is the conflict between helper and dog. If the dog was purely prey motivated, grip problems really would not be an issue. But something interferes with the dogs ability to concentrate purely on the prey. That something is the threatening influence of the helper. The threat can come from the helper merely being present and the dog perceives him as threatening, or the helper deliberately or unwittingly creates threats for the dog by his actions. In other words, the helper stimulates a defensive motivation in the dog. And as mentioned in a previous article, a defensive motivation is nothing more than the dog's concern for his well-being. So, the dog is interested in the prey (sleeve), and at the same time he is concerned for his welfare. That is the conflict. The dog cannot clearly focus and concentrate on his prey, because he is pre-occupied with another concern. It should be clear to everyone that this has to interfere with the dog's ability to deal just with the prey in a clear way.

The second most common cause is the conflict between handler and his dog. Once again, we have a conflict. The dog is interested in his prey, but something else is also on his mind. In this case it is the handler. The dog cannot concentrate on his prey with single minded focus, because he is distracted. Well meaning handlers, who are so busy encouraging their dog, they get carried away, don't do their dogs any favors. I have encountered handlers who just can't stand still, always fidgeting around behind the dog, others who yell the praise so loud, they startle the dog, others who give completely inappropriate commands, still others, who are clearly overbearing and the dog is clearly worried about the person behind him. The list certainly goes on much longer, but these are a few examples to make the point. Again, it is obvious that a pre-occupation with what the heck the handler is doing behind him can't allow the dog to focus where he should, which is the prey.

The third reason is directly related to the second one. This is where handler influence during the teaching of an exercise has led to conflict. In this case, it is quite possible, that the dog and handler have a relatively harmonious relationship, until it comes to certain exercises, or situations which remind the dog of those exercises. The most common offenders are the "Out" exercise, and the "Hold and Bark" exercise. Letting go of the prized prey, or not being allowed to make prey (as in the case of the h&b) lead to conflict, period. No matter how good we are as handlers, interfering with the natural sequence of events, as far as the dog is concerned, will always bother the dog. I would also like to mention that undue and unfair levels of compulsion during the teaching of these exercises will only add to the conflict. When a situation reminds the dog of one of those conflict causing exercises, his focus will shift away from the prey and again he is wrestling with another issue at a time when he should be concentrating on his prey. And grip problems are the result.

Next on the list are temperament deficiencies and behavioral problems unrelated to protection work. Whether these problems are genetic, or whether they were caused by human influence is not really relevant at this point. These dogs have problems dealing with many situations in their life, the fact that they can't clearly focus on prey during protection work is no big surprise. Even if their prey drive is good, there are just too many things interfering with a single minded expression of that drive. I have to say though, that with the average dog out of working line dogs this is the least common cause of grip problems.

Lastly I have to mention that the helper in protection work is the single most important factor that determines gripping technique. No matter what the actual cause of the grip deficiency is, the helper should be the first to notice it and then determine the cause. In some cases not only does the helper not notice anything about the grip until it is too late, but he actually teaches it to the dog. How does he do that you ask? Well, aside from being the cause of conflict (no matter how subtle), he can also reinforce bad gripping behavior no matter where it comes from, by rewarding it unwittingly.

All right, now that we know where the problems come from, how do we figure out what causes them in the individual dog in front of us, and what do we do to improve the deficiency? I am sure there are many ways, but for now I will try to explain how I go about it.

I want to state a premise once again, to avoid any misunderstanding. The assumption for this discussion is that the dog competently bites at least an intermediate sleeve. The specific problems to address are either shallow biting, poor striking with shallow grips, or "munchy", hectic gripping behavior, or any combination of the above.

When presented with such a dog at a seminar, I do what I do with every dog. I feel him out to get a read of the problem. I do this generally by giving the dog some on leash bites. I prefer to always start with a sleeve one level softer than what the dog is used to biting. The reasons for this are that I can feel much better what is happening with the dog's grip at every moment, and I make sure that the dog is not overwhelmed right from the start, so get a better idea of what the dog is all about. I start with a lot of prey attraction and watch the dog's reaction to that stimulus. The dog gets a couple of run-by bites, with strips, to get him in the mood. Then, he deliberately gets a very shallow bite, this allows me to assess how willing the dog is to re-bite and under what circumstances he will and under which he won't re-grip.

This is already the first place where the causes for bad grips will show up. The dog has a chance to work in prey and win right away, I try not to present any defense triggering stimuli. If the dog still acts very defensive, for example, very serious barking when all he should notice is prey attraction, immediate growling on contact with the sleeve, extremely volatile physical maneuvers attempting to get away from me with the sleeve, shallow biting despite the opportunity to bite full, and no or very slow coming re-gripping behavior, are pretty strong signs that the conflict at hand is a defense issue (dog vs. helper conflict).

This is also a good chance to observe the handler with the dog. Constant repetition of commands while I try to get the dog to focus on the sleeve, telling the dog to bark at me, while I try to get the dog to target and get ready to bite, or the "overambitious father" gesturing, where the handler thinks the louder he yells, the more talent the dog gets, are very obvious signs of a handler -dog conflict. How clumsy the handler deals with the dog when the dog has the sleeve, how the dog reacts to praise from the handler while having the sleeve, and how the handler takes the sleeve from the dog to prepare for the next bite, are ways to observe how much harmony or dis-harmony exists between them.

If one of those two conflicts is already noticeable at this stage, I want to explore my initial hunches a bit further. First, to discuss the defense related (helper - dog) conflict. I will now work on getting a good bite from the dog. If the mere sight of me is enough to stimulate defensive behavior, I have to remove that stimulus. Remember the principle is to make the dog think prey and nothing else. I use a puppy tug on a leash to see if I can get the dog to forget all about me for a moment. What I am looking for here is that the dog noticeably concentrates on the object and not on me. Swinging the tug on the leash, with minimal body movements, then making it land on the ground and beside the dog and even behind him a bit allow me to see if the dog is willing to take his eyes off me and pay attention just to the object. Once I notice that type of behavior, I offer an opportunity to bite. Generally the bite is calmer at this point, the leash allows a fair bit of distance between the helper (the defensive stimulus) and the prey, so I can get the dog to re-grip by just relaxing the situation. When the dog shows the calmer grip and re-grip on this easy to bite prey-object, when at a certain distance from the threat, the evidence is fairly clear that the root (at least one of them) for poor grip behavior is a defense related conflict. I can achieve the same scenario by putting a sleeve on a leash and swinging it, or I can offer the dog bites only with my back turned, and never facing the dog acting very weak and non-threatening. I hope that the reader gets the idea here, depending on the level of the dog's sensitivity, I have to remove all defensive stimuli in order to assess the dog's biting in prey drive. As a reminder, defensive stimuli are: Staring, frontal confrontation, threatening hand gestures, stick threats, picking the dog up off the ground (even just his front legs), hard sleeves. Anything that gives the impression to the dog that the helper is something to worry about. I want to address dogs who are more advanced in their training with the same problem. The dog bites calm on a run-by's, but as soon as I face the dog frontally the dog's grip gets busy. Or as long as there is movement before the bite, the dog always bites full, but as soon as he gets no movement and some staring, the dog takes a noticeable shallower bite. All those are very strong indications that the dog is dealing with a helper - dog conflict which he has not yet learned to conquer.

Next, let's explore how we can tell whether we are dealing with a handler - dog conflict. One sign that should be very obvious is a dog who constantly flicks his ears back, or rolls his eyes, to try and keep tabs on the handler at all times. Dog who completely turn away from the action the helper is trying to create when the handler makes himself noticeable. Dogs who stand very uncomfortable while the handler is praising. Dogs who squirm away when the handler is petting them. Dogs who either drop the sleeve like a hot potato when the handler touches them, or dogs who fight with the handler over the sleeve. All of the above would make me speculate that the problem causing conflict is handler - dog dis-harmony. So now we have to test out that theory. So again, we try to remove the influence which causes the conflict as much as possible. The handler is given strict instructions not to move around at all, not to say anything, to just hold the leash at one length and let the helper work the tension. Next, we try to remove all other things where the handler is a big factor, running with the sleeve is reduced to letting the dog circle around the handler once, like a horse on a longe line. Then the dog is reeled in, held by the collar, the handler steps on the sleeve, and pulls steady up on the collar with no other influence until the dog slips off the sleeve. With the same matter of fact attitude, the sleeve is kicked back to the helper, or the handler walks away with his dog, whichever causes less difficulty for the handler. The helper begins his prey attraction again.

Within a few repetitions of this, the dog should be able to concentrate on what we want him to concentrate on, the sleeve, nothing else. If we see noticeable improvements in gripping technique, we have again found the culprit. Briefly on more advanced dogs. The fact that the dogs advanced means that the dog is obviously able to deal with a certain amount of handler interference without showing great effects. With those dogs I experiment with a few different things. For example, I have the handler place his dog in a down position and do a run away bite. Comparing the easy warm-up bite pressure and intensity to the first bite after having to lie down tells us a lot about how much drive the handler takes from his dog because of his influence. Another exercise is to make the dog heel for a bit, then send him for a bite. Compare that to just holding the dog and letting go of the collar when the helper signals. Let the dog bite, walk him away from the handler (leash gets dropped), and then walk back to the handler with the dog. All these are fact finding bites, which need to be compared to each other to determine whether or not the handler is the cause of the conflict. I would say that after doing what I just described an experienced helper should be able to determine if the handler plays a role in the conflict.

The handler can hurt the dog in another way, namely the combination of defense coupled with handler conflict. To determine whether this is the case is fairly straight forward if the reader understands the first two situation. Test the dog with no handler influence and no defense stimulus, then handler influence still no defense influence, then no handler influence with defense stimulus, and then both handler influence plus defense stimulus. Compare all these against each other and make an assessment. Of course the handler influence has to be enough of an influence that the dog shows a reaction (even a slight one) to it. The same goes for the defense stimulus, it has to be a stimulus the dog actually shows a defensive reaction to. It often happens that a dog can handle recovering from handler influence in a split second and respond to a prey stimulus. But handler influence makes them incapable of dealing with defensive stimuli.

The last conflict to discuss is the one caused through the teaching of exercises. In this case the bites are usually good, except in some situations. If the suspicion is then that the dog is experiencing a conflict because he anticipates having to do something he does not want to do, then we again have to explore this hypothesis. Let's say the dog bites good and does not seem to show a particular difficulty with defensive stimuli, then, when the helper's movements slow down, he gets busy or changes his grip from good to more shallow. The same thing happens if the handler steps up to praise the dog, or when the helper takes the dog back to the handler. My suspicion would be the dog feels conflicted when he anticipates an "Out". I would give the dog a run away bite no threat, pull the dog into the typical frontal out position, and tell the handler to give the out command from a short distance away. One of two things will happen. One, the dog starts acting totally uptight, the grip goes to pieces in seconds, and the dog frantically chews around on the sleeve. It does not take a brain surgeon to figure out that that means the dog does not want to let go, but knows there is trouble if he doesn't. And there is our conflict. The other case is this, the dog outs nice and clean. Now what? Were we wrong? Not necessarily. Give the dog another bite, without a lot of stimulation. What do we notice there? Often the bite is now shallow, or it is weaker, or the targeting is poor. If the dog does a hold and bark after the out, the bark is a good indication of how clear headed the dog is in this position. Generally very a-rhythmic and stuttery barks are signs of conflict the dog does not know how to deal with. Again these are the things which should give us confirmation whether or not the "out" exercise is the cause of the conflict. With the hold and bark exercise as the culprit the situation is relatively simple. How well does the dog bark? And how does he bite from the hold and bark, compared to just run by bites?

Naturally we have to also realize that not just the exercises cause this conflict, but everything that may remind the dog of the exercise. For example, the handler approaching, the helper freezing, the blind, any backstop, anything that the training team (handler and helper) did when the exercises were taught, so search your brains. Some dogs never wear a prong collar during protection, only when working on outs or hold and barks. That is enough to cause bad grips whenever the prong collar is on in some dogs.

There is no point in discussing the other situations. Dogs which have temperament or serious behavioral problems, either genetic or learned, need help with those problems long before they should ever do any protection work. And lets hope that the helpers who don't notice that a dog is chewing on the sleeve while they have it on are a dying breed.

Now a brief discussion on how to rectify or at least improve the grip problems caused by the above mentioned conflicts. With the first two causes, the situation is virtually identical. First we have to explore how to get good bites from the dog in question where no conflict exists. I mentioned a variety of ways to do that earlier, so I won't bore people by regurgitating them here. Here is a good rule of thumb. If a dog bites nicely on toys or when they play , then there has to be a way to get them to bite like that in protection. So first we have to find a way to get the desirable bite. There are no limits to a helpers imagination either, whatever works. If I have to go back to a sack, then so be it. A stuffed animal does the trick, fine. If I have to run, then I run until I can't run anymore. And if standing still and swinging something on a rope is required then that is what I do. In order to get a dog to bite a certain way, I have to figure out what makes him want to bite that way. When I have determined how I can get full mouthed calm bites, with decisive re-gripping behavior, then I can start to slowly present the dog with the stimuli which cause the conflict. Then when I see the slightest reaction to that stimulus, I remove it and allow the dog to refocus on what makes him bite well. For example, if defensive stimuli cause the conflict, then I get the dog biting the sleeve (it could be just a tug too) just in prey. When I see the bite is good, I start again with prey attractions, then mix a low level threat into the action, if I hear the slightest bark change, or a less concentrated focus on the sleeve, I work on re-focusing him on the prey, and allow a bite. Eventually, the threatening happens during the bite, then the prey attraction has to trigger the re-grip. I discussed this already in previous articles under countering and channeling defense behavior to prey drive. A dog who has learned to actively counter defensive stimuli and who can channel from defense behavior into prey drive will not show the grip problems we are talking about here. So basically one has to go back to teaching some foundation.

The handler conflict work is similar, figure out how to take the handler out of the picture enough to get good bites, then slowly let the handler get more involved. But the dog has to dictate at what pace that occurs. Then teach better handling, explain what about his handling is causing conflict, and how to avoid those things. The dogs grip initially as well as the confidence in the re-grip during the biting are again the gages for what is working. General team building exercises will help as well, but it would lead too far astray to describe them here.

I promised I would discuss problems with striking in this article. Well, I kind of have. The biggest cause for poor striking, and poor grips on the strike are the above two conflicts and a combination of the two. Dogs who don't strike well frontally, but almost knock you flat on a run away, with the sleeve shoved as far back in their mouth as they can, have a difficulty changing gears. They feel threatened by the frontal helper, and have not yet learned to channel from that defensive feeling into prey drive. So as helpers, we have to show them, by presenting a prey stimulus (run away) to get a good strike and bite. Then we gradually help them less and less while presenting more and more threat. The handler influence conflict rears its ugly head here as well. So, again we make the handler as neutral as necessary to get the good bite, and then gradually involve the handler more and more, until we have him involved as much as he has to be for trial and training purposes.

The exercise related conflicts are fairly straight forward as well. First stay away from the exercises which cause the conflict until there are no more reminder conflicts, ie. when the handler approaches. Then every once in a while put one of the exercises in the mix and make sure the dog comes out of the "conflict hole" all the way before doing it again. As an example, I had a dog in my club, who had a lot of baggage from previous training. He got himself into knots during hold and barks. He was whiny and stressed, and his bites suffered tremendously. But we could not just not do hold and barks. So for every hold and bark I did about 6 or more long pursuits. The dog had very good prey drive, so the running and striking helped him get his feet back on the ground. But it stands to reason, that one or two hold and barks were the dog's absolute maximum. He made good improvements, has a SchH1 and is on the way to a 2.

In conclusion, I want to remind people. The dogs are the biggest part of this sport, they determine the speed of progress, and they ultimately also determine the training methodology. If a dog can grip well but does not always do it, then it is us humans who are doing something wrong. Dogs need to have things taught to them. We present them with problems in protection work and don't take the time to teach them how to solve them. Grip behavior is a very good indication of that. We can't always avoid doing things which cause grip problems, but as we all know, grips are judged in trials, and they should be judged in training as well, so we better make sure we help the dogs get back to where they work as well as they can. Isn't that what training is all about?

Finally a short word of acknowledgement. My friend, Thomas Baumann has summarized pretty much the same root causes for grip problems as I have listed here in his book "Neue Wege der Polizeihundeausbildung". As trainers we are all products of our experiences. I'd like to think that I come up with my own ideas, but reading books and discussions inevitably shape our way of thinking. And since Thomas wrote his book before I wrote this article, I want to share the credit with him.


© Schutzhund Village 2003-2010

superfish v0.02

Woah!!!! That was a very long informative read.thanks lynda