Views of differences in Guarding - Page 3

The object guard in knpv really is a circus trick, can't believe those guys mistake it for territorial instinct or maybe just BM does.

I guess BM knows...

But right now we are talking about the oldest problem - the difference between learned behavior and genetics.
People who don´t train / don´t know how dogs learn will never understand the difference.
They only see the "result", but they are not able to distinguish between training and genetics.

Because of that problem I´ll never stop to animate people to train their dogs...

Horses in a group generally display more raw territorial behaviour than most dogs. They are nasty, brutal pack dynamics to. My horse is fine off property, another horse comes on to the place my horse will try kill them.

 

Ofcourse this dog has learned bark on the box  but he certainly guard the box I give everybody here 100 $ who can steal the box from this dog I realy like to see that


Just waiting for videos here from GSD with the same atitude on a dead subject. Learn to bark is mostly easy on a subject but most dogs don,t realy guard this., this is something difference.

The same we can see on revieren to the helper some dogs only bark

to the helper but don,t guard natural the helper,  other dogs have more

natural guarding instincs it is the art to see the difference who is natural and who is fake..........

 

GSD are to smart to worry about piece of wood, its just Pavlov behaviour what that dog is showing, nothing more, nothing less, expectation only

No it have nothing to do wich breed.........that is not my point.

All breeds have good and  the not so good

 

What I infer from BM's postings on this topic is that the guarding of the still box definitely follow the Pavlovian conditioning concept but there dogs that have a strong genetic guarding component along with such training. So it is possible that the genetics may interact with the conditioning to produce a compound effect which cannot be distinguished even by experienced persons from the " training only" effect.

the exercise itself is Pavlov/conditioning,, the intensity varies per dog also the used reward will give different "picture ' , is the reward a treat or slice of sausage or is the reward a bite, I have seen it trained with a whip also

 

 

Mithuna make some good points about genetics

Its always better to see this dog in real life to get a better opinion , but this dog is not a faker I think most of people who can read dogs would see this. Have seen and train many dogs for box revieren
its a dead object and some dogs don,t care about that , if a dog don,t have the drives natural... for me that dog is game over I don,t like fakers with using whips,food or balls/ ball machine  I hate that kind of training.

I like natural drives not actors on the field.

So what do we see in the video clip posted by BM?

I guess I see a dog more aggressive than prey driven ( item ),
because of very good obedience the dog is in conflict between staying at the item and the will to bite the decoy.
Cap of drives - shown in obedient ( stays at the item ), but well shown aggression.

That´s my interpretation ( has nothing to do with "prey guarding", but with learned behavior of a well trained, strong dog ). Prey aggression - civil aggression? I am not sure, but I tend to civil aggression because of the eyes and the overall behavior.

All of this is just a statement based on some seconds of an internet clip....I may be totally wrong...

Anybody else?