The Biggest Problem of the Breed: Nerves - Page 5

I'll agree, early imprinting has a positive lasting impact.  Although later in training, weak nerves can be conditioned to controlled environmental stressors, but probably doesn't exclude negative reactions to novel situations.  I can train a dog to not molest the cat, but the urge remains present when the prey drive is high.  Advanced training is a form of routine conditioning that doesn't seem to alter the base-nature of temperament.  A careful eye can usually see trough the mask as the excercise is performed.

But basically, the common thread seems to be how the dog reacts to novel situations and environmental stresses (not to include corrections).  There's alot of research relating to the so-called "novelty gene", and alot of working handlers would choose from their prospects the pups that display the most "explorative" nature.  Kind of seems a polarization between confidence and insecurity (not to be confused with dominance/submissiveness) in relation to situation-environment (not social-approach).

Southtexan, I disagree on the need for training or imprinting for adavanced level. If a dog has rock solid nerve and is raised by a regular family he/she still has rock solid nerve. The nerve isn't at an advanced level but the training/exposure/imprinting is advanced. The nerve is still there ready to be utilized. That is why so many military dogs were donated to the military at 2 years after being raised by a regular family with no training or imprinting, and the military takes that dog and develops it into a superb working dog. The dog always had the nerve and it wasn't hindered because it wasn't imprinted by the family. True nerve is genetic and training /imprinting will fall apart if the nerve isn't solid in a high stress endeavor.JMO

I hadn't really thought a lot on how to define this before.  The two things that come close to what I feel we mean when we say "nerve" is the dog's level of confidence/insecurity, and it's level of threshold before reacting to a stimuli... however I do not believe either really defines "nerve"... but both can make a dog with weak nerves look like it has strong nerves especially when the meaning is not well defined.  I am thinking "nerve" really has much more to do with what the dog generally perceives as threatening... not what it does about those things.

You can have a dog that feels a lot of things are a threat but will be confident, forward, and ready to take them on if necessary.  Their threshold will further reveal or cover up their nerviness... as some dogs react quickly to things they see threatening and some need more to react but passively do find the stimuli to be threatening.  Of course there are also many dogs who will not take on the threats.

You can also have dogs that don't perceive much as a threat... I think these ones have the strong "nerves" as not much makes them anxious/nervous.  I don't think we want this in our GSDs either.  I think aloofness, reservedness, "protective" that many like in this breed is really due to not having "rock solid, super strong nerves"... but is appreciated in low levels by many.

Hopefully my thoughts came through correctly.  I'm still all ears to what some of the "old timers" have to say on the subject and how everyone feels we can test for "nerve strength". 

QUOTE: I am thinking "nerve" really has much more to do with what the dog generally perceives as threatening... not what it does about those things.

That was almost like a revelation, and relates to what Gustav commented about active & reactive.  Then given that, I'd guess the socialization process is akin to nerve on the passive level, as training would be on the active level?

Yeah... It did kind of feel like a revelation.    Another thought to throw out there is does "stable" equate to "solid nerves" for most people?  Or does it mean a dog that does not overreact to stimuli... which can be due to solid nerves, high threshold, avoidance behavior when threatened, a combination, etc.?

Again, I bring up the point of passive nerve,ask seeing eye foundations why they shy from the German shepherd these days, and its because of lack of uniform nerve. All nerve does not have to be associated with threat that is overt. It takes nerve to become the eyes and ears of a person in all situations. Just because a dog is TRAINED for assistance work doesn't mean they won't show proper aggression when a threat arises, just like a good herding dog will show protection when the flock is threatened. Its there with a dog with good nerve. There used to be Red Cross dogs in War, think about the traits it takes to be successful at that. Certainly aggression isn't primary but NERVE certainly is important.

Puputz, I'm not certain that a stress-free environment is the accepted rule or not, but I feel that mild stresses induced on the puppies are a very beneficial thing for the long haul.  When testing the total group, I would keep the threshold generally lower, and while testing individuals, you can guage their responses appropriately to maintain a level just below stimulating an adverse reaction.  There are many ways to do this such as lowering temperature, placing them alone in unfamiliar surroundings for a brief time, exposing them to loud sounds, overhead moving objects just to name a few.  By doing these things, this is what is testing what the genetics have predisposed their temperaments for, so each pup is not the same.  But also, it's a form of imprinting behaviors, that is still unlike the conditioning of training routines when the dog is older, in that they will reinforce the genetic disposition for a more lasting effect on their temperaments.

"What does being too stupid to recognize fear fall under?"

Fearless.

From my dictionary.

"Nerve":   a : power of endurance or control,         b : fearless  boldness

with the verb (nerved or nerving) meaning : to give strength or courage to.

"nervy":  a :   showing calm courage : fearless

These are all relative terms and in my opinion mean nothing if everyone's opinion of 'good nerves' is not the same.  I have seen dogs that acted great and could not be shook when accompanied by a handler that was not a dominant figure to them, only to fall apart and look like a completely different dog with shaky nerves when the new handler was stronger.  Can't stand on their own.  Would this dog be considered as having questionable nerves?  Again it's all relative.  What about a dog that was freaky on slick floors at first and then after a few sessions became comfortable on them?  That's why I say it's all relative.  To me, a dog that learns to overcome something when forced to or merely asked to, even with nerves that on the surface look questionable, is a far better dog than one that will jump into fire then realize he's dead before it's too late.  I've had both.  To me the single biggest problem in the breed is lack of courage/softness and or lack of resilience.  I'm speaking about sport dog training now:  We set our dogs up to win win win and do whatever it takes to enable them to win.  Why?  Because the average dog out there doesn't have enough desire to go for it themselves.  No gameness or heart.  Next, we make absolutely sure that we NEVER let anything negative happen to our dogs for fear that the step on the toe or the overly aggressive attack or whip might ruin them.  We have our helpers wait on the dog for perfect positioning during the escape only to get to a trial and have the dog outrun by the helper.  Anyone go to the nationals?  Idon't know Al Kerr personally but I bet you $100 that he knew what would happen and it did.  Not to all of them but a good portion of them and previously HIGH SCORING dogs at that.  I think that until there is an actual tool for testing nerves, (and it ain't schutzhund) nothing will ever change.  JMO       Mike Williams