TEMPERAMENT TESTING by Jim Engel
Throughout our lifetime most of us have grown accustomed to a parade of labor
saving devices, the washing machine, the power saw and more recently the
personal computer. Whether or not our lives are richer is a question for the
philosophers, but certainly our expectation that there is always a way around
the drudgery of labor has been seldom disappointed.
Historically, working dog breeding has progressed by training so as to identify those dogs worthy to carry on the race, to be bred. Although for many of us this is a rewarding and agreeable pastime, others have sought out the short cut, a way to certify breeding stock without the time and effort necessary for training. Many of these people are those with money, who through the professional handler system have purchased prominence and glory in the show dog world without ever getting their hands dirty, often with dogs which they simply purchase and send off to the handler, dogs which have never been in their homes or physical possession.
The labor saving device has inevitably been some sort of a "temperament test," a brief exercise in which the supposedly untrained dog is exposed to a number of situations and an "expert" or a panel of experts make observations and evaluate the dog. Typically, the dog, accompanied by his owner, is approached by a friendly stranger and perhaps a passive stranger and expected to show confidence and no overt aggression. There is usually a gun test and some sort of device to startle the dog, such as an umbrella. There will be some sort of mild agitation to see if the dog will turn on to an aggressor, in which a bite may or may not be expected.
In and of itself, as an exercise to observe the dog, there is nothing inherently wrong with this process. But when substituted as a real test, as a certification of character rather than a superficial and preliminary evaluation, serious questions emerge.
For one thing, the testers are generally not experienced trainers, are in fact drawn from among those seeking to avoid the necessity of training. Serious trainers are generally reluctant to participate, to lend credence to what is an obviously insufficient test being presented in a false light. Thus, the "panel of experts" is often surprisingly light on real experts, that is, those with extensive training experience and solid credentials. The problem, in a nut shell, is that those who would be qualified by experience and accomplishment to serve by and large will not serve precisely because they understand that it is fundamentally and grievously dishonest to participate when such a test is presented as a working character certification.
Another fallacy of the temperament test is that the fundamental premise - that you are looking at the reactions of untrained dogs, a pristine picture not clouded by human interference - is fundamentally and routinely violated. The fact of the matter is that when the results will be recorded and published all serious people will rigorously prepare their dogs, and not present them until virtually certain of success. But the training negates the fundamental premise, for the dog which can be trained to go "woof, woof" at the agitator with the peculiar mannerisms will pass and become a "certified working dog" in the eyes of his owner and those unfortunate enough to buy puppies on the basis of such a test.
Although it has recently again become fashionable to put forth some sort of ill defined "temperament test" as a quick and easy way to promote the breed, this is not a new phenomena. Indeed, each generation has seen its own myth builders come forth to hold out the promise of a simple process to identify and certify dogs as of "working character" without the necessity of training. For those of us who have actually trained dogs the absurdity is profound; but the desire to believe, the attraction of the simple solution, blinds each successive generation.
Perhaps the most fundamental and obvious fallacy is the implication that training in and of itself is without importance. The working willingness, the inborn propensity to form partnership bonds with the human species, to accept training and make work a way of life, is what the working dog, especially those drawn from herding stock, is all about. How can you know if a dog is a working dog without training, putting him in the crucible of the trial and seeing the truth emerge? Tracking or search work demand enormous desire and willingness, are fundamental aspects of the Bouvier as a working breed, yet are totally beyond the scope of temperament tests. Indeed, a twenty minute test cannot because of brevity alone bring forth and make obvious drive and perseverance, offer the steadfast dog no opportunity at all to stand tall in the presence of the pedestrian mass.
Another fundamental failure of the character test is that dogs which will bark and lunge at a mildly offensive agitator are passed, declared to be of working character, without ever truly facing the test for courage, proving the ability to press an attack against a determined, threatening aggressor.
Among serious breeders, more demanding working tests serve as the breeding prerequisite, the test of breeding suitability. These tests vary by nation, with Schutzhund being the German standard, the IPO the very similar test in much of the rest of Europe and the KNPV or Ring trials being the tradition among various elements of the Dutch, Belgians and French. In the Schutzhund world, a dog is required, prior to a trial with protection test, to demonstrate stability and trainability in the test refereed to as the BH or "Begleithund Prufung" in German. The BH is an obedience and character examination with many similarities to the temperament tests as well as fundamental differences.
Historically, working dog breeding has progressed by training so as to identify those dogs worthy to carry on the race, to be bred. Although for many of us this is a rewarding and agreeable pastime, others have sought out the short cut, a way to certify breeding stock without the time and effort necessary for training. Many of these people are those with money, who through the professional handler system have purchased prominence and glory in the show dog world without ever getting their hands dirty, often with dogs which they simply purchase and send off to the handler, dogs which have never been in their homes or physical possession.
The labor saving device has inevitably been some sort of a "temperament test," a brief exercise in which the supposedly untrained dog is exposed to a number of situations and an "expert" or a panel of experts make observations and evaluate the dog. Typically, the dog, accompanied by his owner, is approached by a friendly stranger and perhaps a passive stranger and expected to show confidence and no overt aggression. There is usually a gun test and some sort of device to startle the dog, such as an umbrella. There will be some sort of mild agitation to see if the dog will turn on to an aggressor, in which a bite may or may not be expected.
In and of itself, as an exercise to observe the dog, there is nothing inherently wrong with this process. But when substituted as a real test, as a certification of character rather than a superficial and preliminary evaluation, serious questions emerge.
For one thing, the testers are generally not experienced trainers, are in fact drawn from among those seeking to avoid the necessity of training. Serious trainers are generally reluctant to participate, to lend credence to what is an obviously insufficient test being presented in a false light. Thus, the "panel of experts" is often surprisingly light on real experts, that is, those with extensive training experience and solid credentials. The problem, in a nut shell, is that those who would be qualified by experience and accomplishment to serve by and large will not serve precisely because they understand that it is fundamentally and grievously dishonest to participate when such a test is presented as a working character certification.
Another fallacy of the temperament test is that the fundamental premise - that you are looking at the reactions of untrained dogs, a pristine picture not clouded by human interference - is fundamentally and routinely violated. The fact of the matter is that when the results will be recorded and published all serious people will rigorously prepare their dogs, and not present them until virtually certain of success. But the training negates the fundamental premise, for the dog which can be trained to go "woof, woof" at the agitator with the peculiar mannerisms will pass and become a "certified working dog" in the eyes of his owner and those unfortunate enough to buy puppies on the basis of such a test.
Although it has recently again become fashionable to put forth some sort of ill defined "temperament test" as a quick and easy way to promote the breed, this is not a new phenomena. Indeed, each generation has seen its own myth builders come forth to hold out the promise of a simple process to identify and certify dogs as of "working character" without the necessity of training. For those of us who have actually trained dogs the absurdity is profound; but the desire to believe, the attraction of the simple solution, blinds each successive generation.
Perhaps the most fundamental and obvious fallacy is the implication that training in and of itself is without importance. The working willingness, the inborn propensity to form partnership bonds with the human species, to accept training and make work a way of life, is what the working dog, especially those drawn from herding stock, is all about. How can you know if a dog is a working dog without training, putting him in the crucible of the trial and seeing the truth emerge? Tracking or search work demand enormous desire and willingness, are fundamental aspects of the Bouvier as a working breed, yet are totally beyond the scope of temperament tests. Indeed, a twenty minute test cannot because of brevity alone bring forth and make obvious drive and perseverance, offer the steadfast dog no opportunity at all to stand tall in the presence of the pedestrian mass.
Another fundamental failure of the character test is that dogs which will bark and lunge at a mildly offensive agitator are passed, declared to be of working character, without ever truly facing the test for courage, proving the ability to press an attack against a determined, threatening aggressor.
Among serious breeders, more demanding working tests serve as the breeding prerequisite, the test of breeding suitability. These tests vary by nation, with Schutzhund being the German standard, the IPO the very similar test in much of the rest of Europe and the KNPV or Ring trials being the tradition among various elements of the Dutch, Belgians and French. In the Schutzhund world, a dog is required, prior to a trial with protection test, to demonstrate stability and trainability in the test refereed to as the BH or "Begleithund Prufung" in German. The BH is an obedience and character examination with many similarities to the temperament tests as well as fundamental differences.
The BH is of course not an adequate standard as a breeding criteria, in that it does not have a protection exercise to test courage and discipline under stress, nor a tracking or search test to demonstrate olfactory capacity, working willingness and persistence. The Bouvier des Flandres is a second rate working dog precisely because his breeders have not held themselves to a higher standard. But it is a first step back on the long road to redemption, important in a symbolic as well as a practical sense.
The BH has two parts, a formal obedience test, quite simple and elementary, and a more realistic test in circumstances meant to show the dog's stability in the practical world. In the practical test, the dog must walk on a loose leash and be passed by a jogger, a person on a bicycle and perhaps a slow moving vehicle. The dog must walk on a loose leash past another dog laying beside the path and not show aggression or fear. The judge has some discretion on how the test is structured, so that while you can train for the test, you do not know exactly what your dog will be presented with. The "B" involves a simple obedience exercise, since as a prerequisite to serious protection training it is important to demonstrate that the dog can be taught to obey, that there is a certain level of intelligence and working willingness.
A drawback to the temperament only test is that a stupid or dull dog can usually pass. It may not be a pretty sight, but the dog does not really have to do anything to pass, just not behave badly. A further problem is that it is relatively easy to use drugs to turn a spooky or sharp-shy dog into a simply dull dog and thus pass the test.
For this reason, the obedience exercises, elementary as they are, are essential in that they show the dog can actually respond to handler direction. While one dog is on a long down, the other dog must demonstrate an on lead healing pattern, a walk through a group of people on lead, and then a repeat of the group and healing exercises off lead, during which there is a gun test. Then the dog must demonstrate a walking sit, a walking down and a recall. That's all there is to it, no go out, no retrieve, nothing especially difficult or demanding.
My experience is that temperament tests tend to favor and bring forth the "happy-stupid" dog, the dog who is boisterous, likes everybody and is willing to play the bark and lunge game with the mildly aggressive agitator. He does quite well in the social tests, is oblivious to the gun, indeed is in many ways too stupid to be afraid of anything, and in general is willing to play and enjoy any of the games the temperament test people conjure up. But he is not trainable in a practical sense, is incapable of taking responsibility or exercising judgment and generally is deficient as a protector when the going gets tough, as it from time to time does in the real world. In short, such tests bring forth and promote dogs profoundly deficient in the characteristics and propensities for which our protective heritage breeds were developed, preserved and protected by the founders and succeeding generations of working dog breeders.
Please share and comment.
