When we set about designing a training program for a client we take into account the clients goals the urgency of those goals and the training budget. When we relate those training programs to a working dog role there is immediate time constraint expected.
Let’s look at the roles of a working dog. They can be, for example, as varied as herding cattle or sheep, protecting a security guard or police officer, searching for lost people or detecting drugs explosives or even termites. Each of those areas of work requires the dog to be developed to a level of expertise that ensures they are working at an optimal, predictable level. Standing back and looking at a working dog/handler team it is easy to assume that the dog is a natural at the job and just seems to do it easily. The handler is along for the ride and is merely a director of the dog’s actions. However if the requirement for the dog to carry out the exercise is to do what comes naturally, then it follows that any dog, that can display natural ability, should be able to perform one of those roles.
Given a presumption of soundness, why then, do so many dogs fail the suitability test that precedes the commencement of a working dog program? Is it because the dog has no ability to be trained or is it because the dog doesn’t fit the preset time and money limits of the training program.
Many years ago I started training dog called “Gus” a German Shepherd male. He was owned by Sue who wanted him to be trained to protect her while she was on her daily walk. When I visited Sue and she introduced me to “Gus” I was met by a timid, shivering, urinating ball of fur in the backyard. He had an extreme fear of strangers and immediately ran to furthest corner of the yard to escape the perceived pressure my presence was placing on him. I didn’t push the greeting any further and went inside to discuss training options with Sue.
Fast forward twelve months and Sue and “Gus have just completed a demonstration of protection work in front of hundreds of strangers at a Pet Expo. He was confident reliable very skilled and safe. Sue was a competent handler and Gus enjoyed her company. He was approachable by strangers and showed none of the behaviour I saw on day one.
(Yes I have proof)
So what happened in the preceding twelve months that caused such a major change in Gus’s behaviour. The main component to the success of that change was time.
Sue was extremely committed to the success of the training and that allowed me to implement a training and development program that incrementally worked on Gus and his unnecessary behaviour. The process of change was slow. When we started working on Gus he was twelve months old. He had a well develop level of belief that how he reacted when I first met him was how he should react to ensure his survival. We set about deconstructing that belief. This was done under many different stimulus types and in varying environments. While we were doing that we also introduced a very basic but solid direction of obedience. This alone gave him an opportunity to develop some self confidence and as time went on the level of our obedience expectations from him grew and was matched by his own confidence level.
The point I am trying to make is, if enough time and correct leadership is allowed, desirable behaviours can be easily be developed. Conversely, given the same time but this time with incorrect leadership, undesirable behaviours can just as easily be developed.
Many professional dog trainers don’t set up their training programs to allow for differences in developed behaviours in their client’s dog/s. In fact many dog trainers push that dog to achieve goals aka make money and end up with a mutation of the undesirable behaviour which is then passed off as successful aggression training. If I only allowed three months to train Gus I would have failed dismally in my training goals.
Modern training programs should but don’t embrace long term behaviour change in the program. The dog is a part of the owner’s life for many years it makes sense to be patient with the training. To be anthropomorphic for a second, most parents don’t push their children to be perfect in a given behaviour too early in life. They realise that children have to grow steadily and will develop their individual behaviour and personality through slow and definite guidance accompanied by life experience.
Obviously, it makes sense in any business to start with a product that needs minimal improvement to achieve maximum retail profit. Look at used car salesmen. But I know from personal experience that much talent exists in dogs deemed unsuitable if I allow enough time for training and development.
The purists will say, “if they don’t have it, they don’t have it, and by starting with a dog of less than perfect abilities is to set the working dog/handler team up for failure.”
My comment on that is “that is true - if you are constricted by time and money”