Equivalent working titles? - Page 5

K9 Sar it might be good if you could describe what an urban disaster site is like, the equipment, noise etc. for those who don't know what they are like.

It probably takes better nerve to be an urban SAR than a Sch dog. Before , the purist get all huffy, think......the Sch routine is nothing more than patterned training. That's why so many weak dogs can attain titles. Even protection training, the key element to be successful is a little drive. It is still a patterned routine and weak dogs can pass that as long as the pattern and location remain familar. Remove location or deviate pattern and see what happens to many many sch dogs. Not all but way too many to be a reliable indicator for breed nerve suitability. Now take an urban SAR for instance, that has to work anyplace the incident occurs,any weather, fire smolders, precipitous concrete,bricks, wood, that may or may not be hot. All kind of noises from fire whistles, sirens, constant confusion, screaming, all depending on the situation. The urban search and rescue dog is very similar to the red cross dogs in wars. Look up what they did and the nerve it would take to do that. Think how many Sch dogs you know(if you're honest with yourself) that would have big problems with these elements.  More than that, it requires nerve to be successful at the task under the conditions presented, whatever they are. Dogs that do work have to reason constantly to their capacity to perform their jobs. SAR, Herding,Police, War dogs,etc, all have to be able to work in any condition, and figure out what to do as situations arise. For SAR it is often how to navigate the terrain after an explosion or collapse.    Now before Sch purist get their knickers in a bind, I'm not say no sch dog can become an urban SAR. What I'm saying is that the elements that many sch people use to define NERVE for everybody else(noise, nightwork, slippery surfaces,unfamilarity with what's next), is what a certified urban SAR deals with routinely and Sch has been watered down to where a routine patterned dog can attain the title. Doesn't make Sch bad at all and it is the only test for breed worhiness inplace, but the topic is NERVE, and it takes more nerve to do working tasks than patterned training.JMo 

One last thing, I am not saying SAR and Sch are equivilant.  Actually eqivilant working titles is based on a premise of apples to oranges. I am saying that when it comes to nerve as the topic moved into, I think working titles require more reliable nerve than sport.

A dog with weak nerves will not be able to reason under stress!!!!! They will resort to instinctive drives to deal with the situation,flight,fight, avoidance!!! Think about it?! Patterns lead to familarity leads to lessening of stress for dog to perform with less than strong nerve.

Thank you Gustav, very well put. Before I continue, my dogs do Sch. and I have titled my usar dogs in Sch. ( team recently retired a Sch. 3, USAR male.)

I would like you to take a step back. Everyone please read the posting, then think of the scenes on television from the following devestations.Television pics do not even come close to the real thing!!!

LA earthquakes, recent bridge collapse, LA fires, the attacks on the pentagon, the world trade center, the space shuttle disaster. OK, what they all have in common are:

high stress for all concerned, potential toxins, mass confusion (yes, even when authorities are in place.) the use of heavy equipment that the dogs work around as  the equipment is being used. loose dogs, cats, food everywhere from the collapse, other working dogs unleased and uncollared working loose on the site. It's hot, it's raining, its slippery. The dogs constantly have to problem solve.

Imagine sending your dog into a void that you can't fit into and nervously waiting for the dog to either alert to the scent of life or wondering if your dog will return. That folks is what nerves and temperment are about..

A the trade center, my teammate sent her dog into a void (remember 16 acres of twisted steel etc.) only to have the dog return 30 minutes later from several streets away ,past all the equipment.  

PERHAPS THIS SHOULD ALSO BE TITLED HANDLER NERVES!!!! 

stay safe and be well folks.

K9SAR, Gustav -  thanks for your posts - I have not worked disaster, only wilderness, but know that even there the wrong dog will crumble; people understimate the need for courage and nerves in the real working world.  I don't have the nerves (or the youth and fitness) for urban SAR.  But we still must know how to deal with dangers in the woods.   

The more I learn the less I see schuzthund as a true comprehensive test; I think one of the ring sports or something that is not so patterned and predictable and  that really puts pressure on a dog would be a better test.  I think schutzhund has its merits but people sometimes take a dog and work around real issues to get titles rather than using the issues to say "maybe this dog is not suitable and we should not proceed"   -- with the working search dog there is little tolerance for an issue that could show a latent weakness.  So the title to me would be a plus but not the whole thing.

 I sure know how a lot of police feel about sport titles as a means to evaluate working stock. 

Very interesting topic, I've enjoyed reading the replies.  The problem which has been danced around but not stated, is the lack or inability to evaluate a dog.  To know and understand schutzhund one must understand its history and which exercises have been eliminated.  The exercises which helped provide a better evaluation on the dogs was eliminated  to make the SPORT of schutzhund user friendly.

Schutzhund training as a true evaluation is done on the training fields, not at trial.  Schutzhundology is the method by which trainers and breeders have to evaluate their dogs.  Someone mentioned that Tarzan was a sch 1 dog and a much desired stud dog.  Below is a link to a nice test for a potential service dog.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HZn5Dl7uD8

I pesonally like this dog from the video but would like to see him in person.

Problem with Leo trainers is that most still use old school methods of training ie. Koelher.  Most Leo trainers don't understand schutzhund and think the training is all about points.  Berhard FLinks, Gerald Groos, Horst Dieter Trager and Mike Diehl are excellent examples of LEO trainers that know and understand the merits of Schutzhund.

Most sport dog trainers think the dog should be heeling and looking at the handler in the back transport.  This is wrong and a misunderstanding of the exercise.  The crossover for training the back transport for service and schutzhund is with the dog looking at the suspect while feeling the handler by touching or leaning into the handler.

Sport dog trainers also need to vary their training scenarios to alleviate boardom ie. bitesuit training, track to a suspect with a sit and bark, grip under a pick up truck, send the dog down into a dark basement for a sit and bark.  These are all intersting ways to evaluate a dog. 

Lastly some dogs should only get a sch 1 then go onto service work.  Why spend time gaining extra titles when their talents are more suited for service work?

Kyle

Very interesting topic, I've enjoyed reading the replies.  The problem which has been danced around but not stated, is the lack or inability to evaluate a dog.  To know and understand schutzhund one must understand its history and which exercises have been eliminated.  The exercises which helped provide a better evaluation on the dogs was eliminated  to make the SPORT of schutzhund user friendly.

Schutzhund training as a true evaluation is done on the training fields, not at trial.  Schutzhundology is the method by which trainers and breeders have to evaluate their dogs.  Someone mentioned that Tarzan was a sch 1 dog and a much desired stud dog.  Below is a link to a nice test for a potential service dog.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HZn5Dl7uD8

I pesonally like this dog from the video but would like to see him in person.

Problem with Leo trainers is that most still use old school methods of training ie. Koelher.  Most Leo trainers don't understand schutzhund and think the training is all about points.  Berhard FLinks, Gerald Groos, Horst Dieter Trager and Mike Diehl are excellent examples of LEO trainers that know and understand the merits of Schutzhund.

Most sport dog trainers think the dog should be heeling and looking at the handler in the back transport.  This is wrong and a misunderstanding of the exercise.  The crossover for training the back transport for service and schutzhund is with the dog looking at the suspect while feeling the handler by touching or leaning into the handler.

Sport dog trainers also need to vary their training scenarios to alleviate boardom ie. bitesuit training, track to a suspect with a sit and bark, grip under a pick up truck, send the dog down into a dark basement for a sit and bark.  These are all intersting ways to evaluate a dog. 

Lastly some dogs should only get a sch 1 then go onto service work.  Why spend time gaining extra titles when their talents are more suited for service work?

Kyle

SchH was designed to be a minimum standardized test.  Any serious breeder of working dogs would be crazy to use it as their only means of testing.  SchH and the training for titles can tell us a lot about our dogs if we want to listen, but unfortunately it doesn't test enough, at least not IMO. 

I would consider breeding to a USAR dog ,  PSD or HGH titled dog. 

Lisa

http://www.zutreuenhanden.com/