You know there will never be a real consensus.

I say: Dogs A & B - civil, with different levels of sociability. Safe, sane, dogs. Both are fine in many different situations, and are fine with the average person (assuming that the average person is someone like me, and most people on this forum). This is were people need to understand temperament and drives when discussing what they are looking for with a breeder - I specifically wanted a friendly dog that makes friends easily, as I tend to isolate myself so socialization can be an issue - but not so much if the dog is people-oriented and naturally friendly. So that was a consideration in my choice of breeders.


Dog C - a nut case. Shouldn't be out in public. Probably what most people would call sharp.

 

It has always been my understanding that civil is just a willingness to bite a human. Contrary to popular opinion, most dogs will choose not to bite but would choose flight, or freeze, over fight or bite if possible.

IMO, social means the degree of willingness to meet or tolerate human overtures.

IMO, threshholds vary from low to high and is a measure of IF, and when, a dog will determine a threat and act on it.

IMO, sharpness is related to threshholds but the difference lies in a dog determining a threat but not acting on it such as a dog being suspicious but adopting a wait and see attitude.

 

It has always been my understanding that civil is just a willingness to bite a human. Contrary to popular opinion, most dogs will choose not to bite but would choose flight, or freeze, over fight or bite if possible.

IMO, social means the degree of willingness to meet or tolerate human overtures.

IMO, threshholds vary from low to high and is a measure of IF, and when, a dog will determine a threat and act on it.

IMO, sharpness is related to threshholds but the difference lies in a dog determining a threat but not acting on it such as a dog being suspicious but adopting a wait and see attitude.

Sabi was taught to respond to an invisible boundary around me. One of the things she taught herself was to stand up and push people back with her front legs to put them back outside that boundary. It was sort of like her saying 'ok I will explain this one last time' She never did it twice, but I always read it as she was really not wanting to bite, and trying to prevent it. On command, she would bite without hesitation.

 

MAWL list is kind of my understanding, too, at least to now.

When I hear a dog is civil, that's a dog I respect and give distance to, a dog that might bite for real.

But there are bite-happy dogs that just bite because it feels good, they don't see a threat, they don't see a challenge, they just are triggered to bite for fun. They can be super social, forward dogs, too. This type of dog needs control for safety, but isn't really what I'd call a civil dog... or am I making this all too complicated.

 

"or a liability who perceives threats that aren't there (maybe even picks fights on occasion?) and takes matters into their own "paws".


this is just an unstable dog

 

This is likely very true. (probably straight-up fact)

But . . .

Isn't it safe to say that a dog with high levels of civility and anything less than stable, rock-solid nerves is, more likely than not, a liability?

And if you're breeding for highly civil dogs, granted you'll produce pups that vary on the civil scale. But you'll also get pups that waver on the stable-nerves scale too, right?

 

Civil = A dog that will engage or show aggression without the aid of equipment or any kind of stimulation from the decoy / bad guy. This can be easily trained with a good dog.

A civil dog can be high or low threshold, prey oriented, defensive or socially aggressive.

Certain types of dogs take to this type of work more easily over others. The most essential trait is confidence followed by drive.

Many people falsely label fear aggression as civil. This will quickly be exposed when the dog is properly tested.

 

Civil = A dog that will engage or show aggression without the aid of equipment or any kind of stimulation from the decoy / bad guy. This can be easily trained with a good dog.

A civil dog can be high or low threshold, prey oriented, defensive or socially aggressive.

Certain types of dogs take to this type of work more easily over others. The most essential trait is confidence followed by drive.

Many people falsely label fear aggression as civil. This will quickly be exposed when the dog is properly tested.

The whole point is that this is a genetic trait , just as prey oriented dogs are what they are because of breeding choices .

You don't train it into a dog.
A good decoy , not prey / play , will expose the dog and allow him to perform at his best .

" This can be easily trained with a good dog"

How ?

"A civil dog can be high or low threshold, prey oriented, defensive or socially aggressive"

But they are not prey oriented ! But they are not defensive !
Thresholds are high . They don't stimulate easily. Watchful and aware yes .

All those reasons are why this type of dog is disappearing from the GSD breeding pool.

 

CarolinaRose , the dog that you are describing will avoid .
That is the opposite of taking charge and dominating a situation , a confrontation.
With the civil dog the tougher it gets, the more punishing , the more the dog digs in and fights.

 

IMO, civil is just another trait in the temperament package. It is not stand alone, nor is it exclusive of prey or defense. A highly prey driven dog can be civil.

When it comes to defense, then I view it a little differently. A dog with solid nerves, strong temperament and high drives (prey and defense) can be civil.

There is a distinction in my mind between a "civil" dog and an overly defensive dog. IME, I would not call an overly defensive dog, "civil". The dog that makes the big aggressive show, baring teeth, lots of posturing and barking, is more defensive. That doesn't mean the dog will not bite a person for real, with out equipment, but much higher on the defense scale. When we start adding "defense" in to the conversation, we need to see the triggers, body language and reaction.

As Carmspack correctly stated:

CarolinaRose , the dog that you are describing will avoid .
That is the opposite of taking charge and dominating a situation , a confrontation.
With the civil dog the tougher it gets, the more punishing , the more the dog digs in and fights.

This is true. When discussing defense, another trait in dogs, higher defense can become avoidance or flight. It is another balance, and fight and flight and perceived threat and desire to win come in to the analysis.

This is similar to saying that a dog is "very social", odds are a very social dog will not be "civil", IMO.

I'm sure I am confusing the issue for some.

It is very clear to me when I look at a dog and want to evaluate it's temperament and drive package. I never take one trait and analyze it separately. That would be like looking at a dog with a wagging tail and saying, "he's friendly!" Or a dog with it's ears back and flat on it's head and thinking the dog is submissive or happy. For clarity, tail wagging is excited, not always "happy." Aggressive dogs wag their tails too, just differently. A dog with it's ears pinned back on it's head are not necessarily happy or submissive, all pointy eared dogs put their ears back before they bite. The point is that it is never good to analyze a dog by one trait, behavior or signal from it's body language.

"Civil" is simply one of the terms used to describe a dog's temperament. A dog can have high prey and even high defense and be civil, if it has a balance and the right nerve strength, confidence and strong temperament to handle those drives. A dog that is highly defensive, with lower nerve strength or a lesser temperament is defensive. I would not categorize a dog with weaker nerves, but highly suspicious as "civil." Even though the dog may bite a person for real with out any bite equipment present.

It is the whole package in a dog that makes up the dog's temperament. I agree, it is rare to see it in GSD's these days.

I think it comes down to the whole package of drives, thresholds and temperament that make up the dog. I would not consider Lassie "civil." When I say a dog is "civil" I am describing a dog with a balanced drive and temperament package, a dog that has defense combined with solid nerves and a strong temperament. The dog is not very social with strangers, more aloof. The dog will absolutely respond to a challenge, but not in an overly defensive way. The dog will have a "presence." One that is easily recognizable, people will ask before approaching and petting this type of dog. IMO, a "civil" dog may not be the dog that you bring to the family picnic.

I'm sure that just adds more confusion to the topic.

 

@Slamdunc

I am from the train of thought that civil is of a temperamental quality as well, which would make it heritable.

There are those of who believe that a dog can be taught to be civil, and I can't necessarily say I disagree, but maybe different terminology should be used to distinguish the difference. After all, many fear biters will bite without equipment too but we don't qualify them as civil either.

What I am curious about is how does either of these types of dogs play into the selection of a dog by you for work. Would both qualify? Why or why not?

 

I sometimes think the word civil should be discarded, since it causes so much confusion, even among the very experienced. I prefer to distinguish the temperament characteristics by using active aggression versus a dog that must be placed into a defensive posture to elicit the same response. Carmen's description of a highly confident dog that is able to be relaxed and social and carefree, yet possesses high levels of active aggression when the situation warrants is dead-on. This is the old "farm dog" that was so highly prized. Intelligent, stable and able to appropriately discern when there was a threat and when there was not. Watchful and always thinking, but not suspicious and with low thresholds. I think many are skeptical that a dog with high levels of natural, appropriate aggression can still be highly social and stable in all environments because you just don't see many of them any longer. As Carmen has repeatedly opined, it is in large part due to the fact that what sport buyers think they want pressures breeders to produce it and the downward spiral has begun. These dogs are perfectly able to live in a relatively clueless pet home and not be a danger/liability because of their stable temperament--and, yes, I have watched a good number of these dogs in such settings because of my interest in certain breedings. They are not incredibly flashy in obedience on the sport field but do well. In some lines, the hunt drive has been preserved to make anyone who can hang onto a line look like a tracking genius. And, again, as Carmen has said, it takes a decoy with a lot of presence and knowledge of temperament to work them properly. With a good decoy, they explode on the protection field and are a joy to watch.

 

This reminds me of our last shepherd to a tee. A Working line from Belgium. He had quite the presence. He was aloof to all but immediate family members. Aloof so much as I don't think he so much took notice to anyone outside his circle. He would show his soft side to only those he knew well. He never barked when someone came at the door he would just loom down the stairs -at the time we lived in a high ranch. He would see who entered the house and would go lie back down. Actually he never barked ( only if happy or excited) he was all business. Quiet intense dog. A silent demand for respect of his own space. He would eat someone if we were in seriously harmed by someone thankfully he never had to and never saw that side but had no doubt it was there. Never over reacted to anything accept hated to go to the vet. Definately not a dog you would bring to family picnics although if someone threw his Kong he would be delighted to play fetch.

 

Lisl is a K9 bred GSD and this thread has taught me a little bit more about her. I have never owned this type of working line, and she was a challenge as a pup, but extremely smart and willing to learn and perform tasks. She is extremely bonded to me but without displaying any separation anxiety.

Her temperament has always slightly confused me until today.

If I had to rate her, I would say 70% civil and 30% social.

She considers a stare as a challenge and will meet that challenge moving towards the perceived threat. She is more alert to her surroundings and environment than any of my other GSD's were, and will react to certain stimuli. I believe she would bite if I allowed her to go that far.

She is not a social dog, and will not allow you to pet her or otherwise interact with her. She may come up to you for a sniff and a once-over, but you cannot touch her. As a warning she may grab your hand and release it with no other verbal warning. But she is serious. I believe that she would not consider you a threat in a social setting after I tell her it's OK for this person to be here, but she will only tolerate you being here because I say so. She is fine around groups and family & friends and will not growl or otherwise display aggression in a social situation, unless she perceives a threat to her or me.

I do wish I could be more specific and have one or more of you experienced handlers evaluate her to see if you see in her what I see.

I used to think she had a touch of 'nerve bag' as she was maturing. But I no longer think of her as having that problem. She has rock-solid nerve. I just did not know what I was looking at until reading this thread.

Thank you.

 

I don't believe a person can say that their dog is civil, unless they have actually tested them in realistic scenarios with hidden protection equipment on the decoy, or had them in a situation where there was a real threat, and the dog responded correctly with a real bite (voodoolamb's dog comes to mind - he protected her from an assault).

 

I think there is still some confusion about what civil means in the GSD world and what breeders mean by it. Basically Civil means 'is willing to bite for real'.

Of course, there are a lot of unstable nerve-bags out there there who have and would bite anything that comes within range - those dogs are NOT civil, they are unstable, crazy, dangerous dogs.

Many people on this thread have tried to clarify that being civil also means being clear, confident, high-threshold, easily trained, controlled, and may or may not be social.

A dog may be all these things, and NOT be civil, meaning that if the chips are down, they will not bite or attack, even if they posture a lot and act aggressive.

 

Hello, Castlemaid, YES there is a lot of confusion especially for those of us who are mere pet owners! I am almost embarassed by my post on this thread about my two shepherds! Yikes! I am definitely out of my league on this one :crazy: Haha! I surely do enjoy all the info, though!

 

I had set up a scenario when she was a little over a year old with a helper. She would have bitten the helper had I not restrained her. She did this on command after being alerted to a possible threat as the helper approached in a threatening manner.

This wasn't a laboratory, scientific test mind you, but I know she would have bitten my helper. We did this a couple of different times. I never did it again after that.

I believe I wrote about this several years ago. But I did not know what I was seeing until this thread came along.

 

Ah! I see - I still would not say that a dog is civil if "they would have bitten" without the test carried through. Some dogs will just nip, and quickly dart away - a fearful reaction. Dogs that latch on and hang on are being civil - again, if doing this in proper defense, not inappropriate aggression.

But to avoid confusion - a dog is civil, or is not. There is no percentage of being civil.
I think the most accurate way to describe Lisl is that you feel confident that she will protect you. If she came from police k9 lineage, there is a very good chance that she is civil, as that is something genetic, based on their inner confidence that they can take on a person in a fight, and win.

 

This thread has been amazing. And I'm glad that it's helped some people have a better understanding of who their dog is. A pleasant and unexpected outcome to this thread

I was trying really hard to understand what Camspack was saying, but I think Castlemaid helped to clear that up a lot.

But to avoid confusion - a dog is civil, or is not. There is no percentage of being civil.

Pure and simple, straight to the point, a dog will either fully engage, or they wont. And that's something I'm willing to accept and live with.

Also, that means that all those other scenarios that involve a dog engaging but under the wrong circumstances involve not just a civil dog, but other drives and even a lack of stable nerves as well. Things got a little clearer when someone brought up the "defensive drive". I could easily see how a dog with a high defense drive and low threshold ( do all drives have a threshold?) could find offense where none was intended and feel the need to engage. That actually makes sense to me.

That said, how high should a dog's defensive drive be? Or should a dog HAVE a high defensive drive, so long as he has the high threshold to go with it?

Also, I'm a little confused as I think Carmspack gave some conflicting information.

Would a civil dog with unstable nerves attack or not? What other ingredient would a civil, weak nerved dog need to engage and not avoid?

I need to go to work so I'll find the exact passages that are confusing me later (tomorrow or so), but until then I think this is the only thing still confusing me.

I'm trying to figure out how to accurately describe the traits I'm looking for in a dog before I go puppy-shopping . . . X many years from now

 

Was the helper wearing equipment?

 

No. None.

And then based on what you say Castlemaid, she is civil.

 

Nope! Can't say she is. You CAN say that you are quite satisfied within yourself that she will defend and engage, but you cannot say that she is civil if she has not actually bit full, and held on through a fight.

Since your helper was not wearing hidden protection equipement, you could not test her to see if she was civil.

Was your helper an experience police dog trainer who has taken bites while wearing protective equipment?

Because I can say from witnessing dogs being trained, that many a dog that will bite equipment (bite sleeves and visible bite suits) will NOT engage a person for real. They understand the difference between biting a person for real, and that this is now a real fight they have to finish if they start. Dogs that EVEYONE thought would engage a helper with hidden equipment, did not, even though the decoy was experienced in bringing defensiveness out of dogs.

You just can't say one way or another until the dog is put to the test.

Disclaimer: Do NOT try this at home, kids! The examples and stories being related here were carried out by highly experienced Police K9 dog trainers!

 

I admit myself not even close in this league and a bit embarrassing as I still ramble on, but this thread reminded me our last shepherd who I felt was always rare. Our last shepherd had some police dog training which he flunked out as he would not release. his second owner did schutzhund work with him. He also had a attack word which was never told to me. I just made sure it was not something that can be mistaken. So through none of my experiences has he had to bite anyone but have no doubt he would of. Even dogs that would approach seem to have respect him. I remember it was a day after I came home from the hospital with having my baby I took karat for a walk a pit bull was going crazy as we walked down the street hopped the fence came charging right in a snarling rage at us. I thought it was over and looking for a car to duck in and set off an alarm. Karat stood his ground and they smelled nose to nose -yikes- not even butts and the pit bull went turned right back to his yard. I never saw anything like it. I thought karat exuded some kind of special musk. I walked over and picked up the leash and was greatful for him we were safe and walked away. He was a very different dog and find thread this very interesting. Always liked to learn more about him.

 

It was the local K9 officer that lives across the street from me. He is the person who introduced me to Lisl's breeder.

If a full-bite is a prerequisite, then she is not civil. Until she is.

 

Nice - thanks for that info. I think that since your helper was a K9 officer, his input would be quite reliable. Lisl sounds like a great dog.

 

Could be - but biting full and holding on is genetic - many an untrained dog with the right genetics will bite and hold on.

 

:thumbup:

 

My helper seemed to think she would have bitten him given the chance. Just as soon as I stopped her and told her OFF OFF OFF, she was just as calm as before.

I hope it doesn't happen, but I guess I will have to wait and see if she ever bites under the right (bad) circumstances.

 

I haven't read most of the recent responses, but here is my two cents. You can not train a dog to be civil. Either it is or it isn't. It's genetics. Biting without equipment by itself doesn't make a dog civil. Otherwise every fear biter out there would be considered civil. It goes much deeper than that. Like most things, it's too hard to describe over the internet. You (general) need to get out there and see a lot of dogs work or work them yourself to really start to understand the differences. There is so much more to drives and temperament than what meets the eye and as some of you are finding out, some play into another.

 

MichaelE I would NOT say that your dog is "civil"


this "She considers a stare as a challenge and will meet that challenge moving towards the perceived threat. She is more alert to her surroundings and environment than any of my other GSD's were, and will react to certain stimuli. I believe she would bite if I allowed her to go that far. "

this is a fearful dog -- a CONFIDENT dog able to push his agenda and dominate an aggressor or a situation has NO FEAR .

don't concentrate on the bite -- concentrate on the powerful will to control and be victorious , which may or may not need a bite .

someone asked " After all, many fear biters will bite without equipment too but we don't qualify them as civil either.

What I am curious about is how does either of these types of dogs play into the selection of a dog by you for work. Would both qualify? Why or why not?
Answer -- a fear biter is useless.
You can't predict when his LOW threshold is crossed , you can not rely on the dog .

There is no MENTAL STAMINA for pressure .

He will leave you standing there to face the "danger" by yourself , after having aggravated the situation by going in for a DEFENSIVE , fear based bite , which may be pre-emptive at first glimmer of threat (or not) to AVOID .
Fear reaction is an avoidance tactic .

Civil is CONTROL of the situation. No fear .
You can rely on him to handle and finish the situation to a satisfactory conclusion .


CarolinaRose-- I don't know where this comes from "Also, I'm a little confused as I think Carmspack gave some conflicting information.

Would a civil dog with unstable nerves attack or not? What other ingredient would a civil, weak nerved dog need to engage and not avoid?"

because I have said many many times that a civil dog
does NOT have unstable nerves.
That is an unstable dog . Working in defense which has two options , fight or flight.

A civil dog when pushed into conflict works OFFENSIVELY . There is no avoidance / flight option.
They command the situation, escalate as needed , and aim to be the victor.

mycobra --- YES YES YES "I haven't read most of the recent responses, but here is my two cents. You can not train a dog to be civil. Either it is or it isn't. It's genetics. Biting without equipment by itself doesn't make a dog civil. Otherwise every fear biter out there would be considered civil. It goes much deeper than that. Like most things, it's too hard to describe over the internet. You (general) need to get out there and see a lot of dogs work or work them yourself to really start to understand the differences. There is so much more to drives and temperament than what meets the eye and as some of you are finding out, some play into another"

It is not trained. It is or it isn't.

the problem is that many younger GSD fanciers and sports people have not experienced this kind of dog as they are being phased out .
They are not flashy, reactive , and there are not decoys that can work them to showcase their stuff.

Pam get "it" "

I sometimes think the word civil should be discarded, since it causes so much confusion, even among the very experienced. I prefer to distinguish the temperament characteristics by using active aggression versus a dog that must be placed into a defensive posture to elicit the same response. Carmen's description of a highly confident dog that is able to be relaxed and social and carefree, yet possesses high levels of active aggression when the situation warrants is dead-on. This is the old "farm dog" that was so highly prized. Intelligent, stable and able to appropriately discern when there was a threat and when there was not. Watchful and always thinking, but not suspicious and with low thresholds. I think many are skeptical that a dog with high levels of natural, appropriate aggression can still be highly social and stable in all environments because you just don't see many of them any longer. As Carmen has repeatedly opined, it is in large part due to the fact that what sport buyers think they want pressures breeders to produce it and the downward spiral has begun. These dogs are perfectly able to live in a relatively clueless pet home and not be a danger/liability because of their stable temperament--and, yes, I have watched a good number of these dogs in such settings because of my interest in certain breedings. They are not incredibly flashy in obedience on the sport field but do well. In some lines, the hunt drive has been preserved to make anyone who can hang onto a line look like a tracking genius. And, again, as Carmen has said, it takes a decoy with a lot of presence and knowledge of temperament to work them properly. With a good decoy, they explode on the protection field and are a joy to watch.
__________________


I was not familiar with Pam as a poster and wondered why in her posts on this thread that she got "it".
Then, looked at her signature line and the two Wolfstraum dogs , and there was my answer.
Lee Ms Wolfstraum knows and appreciates , Vandal knows and appreciates, Lisa -- also, mycobra also.
Sorry my friends -- the older crew .

And when you talk of such dogs then the ageist cracks and the unicorn inhabited garden insults are brought out .

Genetically , it comes from herding stock.
In the beginning the main stud Hektor came from Thuringian quarter of the 4 old pillars for the prick-ear and wolf like appearance .
Most modern sport and show lines focus on this portion.

Herding stock including the Swabian herding and courageous , intelligent , biddable, aloof ,Wurtemberger

and Swabian GUARDIAN(molosser type ) who were larger , strong , steadfast, (my favourite phrase) calm and tenacious . They would not back down from a fight.

The later mentioned herding group is disappearing .

 

here is one of my discussions on the genetics of this civil GSD (2012)

"

but the Swabian dogs represented two types - one the Swabian herding sheep dog and the TALLER Swabian service dog more of a guardian type and having excellent qualities for war time and police service . They were used to protect the flock against thieving poachers, wild hogs, bear and intruding stray dogs , without the behaviour that you see in other livestock guardian dogs which "become" the sheep through immersion imprinting at critical developmental times (Konrad Lorenz). This kept them multifunctional . (Hoheb Espe)
The Wurttemberger and Swabian (both) (von der Krone) did bring active aggression -- not reactive which was the case in the Thuringian (which Horand/Hektor was). Horand/Hektor and neither of his parents had HGH. The herding blood was brought in through the females .
Max was never the breeder , never had the success that "So" Eiselen had with Horand . So's reputation was well established and there are articles which give credit to So mixing the different regional types . "So" was the man behind von der Krone - Horand/Hektors best stock was under the guidance of So - to "unknown herding stock" so regional - mid German (Wurtemberg / Swabian ?) type. These became foundation dogs. Max could not ever match the quality of these dogs .
More important Max did not heed So's advice to NOT - NOT linebreed on Horand / Hektor , which he did against the advice bringing a very beautiful dog in to the world Roland Starkenburg -- but temperamentally suspect , excused away by Max as having been spoiled and over indulged.

The "other" lines were not mystery unknown lines , they were the creation of different shepherds relying on the excellence of their dog's , as tools, for their livelihood and well being. Above all they had the gift on instinct for the work. They would have been recorded in personal , private records , memory, reputation -- oral history.
PUBLIC registry , the records of breed clubs , were new on the scene. A very good book to read is Bred for Perfection Bred for Perfection: Shorthorn Cattle, Collies, and Arabian Horses since 1800 - Margaret E. Derry - Google Books
Sometimes numbers were created for some of these females , other times it was "unknown" as shrug unrecorded - but you ask the owner and they knew for sure , if at the minimal they knew the performance ability . All you need to do is to thoroughly read the von Stephanitz book with his details about OTHER herding dogs.
You have to include a fourth pillar of the modern german shepherd and that would be Rolf Osnabruckerland "

von Stephanitz lays it out nicely right there in his GSD book .

I am looking at a pedigree , reserving a pup to recover some valuable lines that I have lost , that drips in genetic civil material ---