No title

To make the competitions more fun and distinguish each title’s requirements as much as possible while still preserving the basic test.

Return to the idea of Schutzhund being more of a temperament test. There is no question that over the past ten years, there has been a great deal of pressure to bring more control into Schutzhund while paying less attention to its primary purpose, a test of the fundamental character of the dog. Certainly, over the years, Schutzhund has become something more than a pure temperament test with competitions, recreation and dog training sharing the rewards. But the undercurrent of understanding the dog for the good of future generations of working dogs was always primary.

Offer an opportunity for younger or starting people to get their feet wet through a program that balances the challenge of training with rules that don’t disqualify a team for sometimes the smallest infractions. This lack of balance has led to many starting people leaving Schutzhund because it is too hard or unfair. It is hoped that a better balanced program will lead to a greater interest in training and breeding the true working dog.

Lastly, the AWDF program offers an independent view of what the test of the working dog should be. With things going as they have over several years in Europe, many in this country have felt we are being held hostage by Europe’s political views and humane laws. This new program gives America a choice, at any time, to offer an alternative to Americans who may be turned away by matters outside our control.

A team is now required to have a minimum score of 80 points in protection to pass. This is a return to the old Schutzhund weighing of the protection score, believed by many breeders to be the most telling part of the overall test.

Courage and hardness return as a part of the judge’s evaluation of the temperament of the dog. It is not incorporated into the score, as in past times, but rated from 1 to 10 along with the usual rating of “pronounced, sufficient or insufficient” as is currently the rule. So a score book entry might show: “pronounced/9.5”. It was felt that this is one more bit of information that breeders could find valuable in determining the qualities of an individual dog.

Calm bites are no longer a part of the judge’s evaluation of either performance or temperament.

One significant change is on the outs. A handler is given two opportunities to out the dog from a distance. If the dog doesn’t out, the handler can approach the dog to within a few feet and give a third command. If the dog outs, the trial continues. If not, the dog is excused. This is another example where the rules are encouraging the judges to allow a hander to complete the trial. The score may be terrible, but the handler gets to finish.


	A SYNOPSIS OF THE NEW AMERICAN WORKING DOG TITLES Gary Patterson On February 4, 2008, The American Working Dog Federation adopted the formal rules for a working dog program to award working dog titles for all breeds. AWDF is an umbrella organization of fourteen clubs that cover breed, sports and utility programs for dogs in North America. This new program will be available at trials conducted by these member clubs who choose to participate. As an example, at a club trial, there can be endurance tests, breed surveys, VPG or IPO competitions and AWDF titles. Currently, they will only be American titles and not recognized internationally until AWDF attains full member status with FCI, a work in progress. The first question should be: Why do we need an American title with all the other titles offered? To keep everything in perspective, remember that Schutzhund was always a German title. In fact, it is only one of the working titles offered by over ten countries in Europe; each county has its own view of how to define and test the working dog. Schutzhund has clearly been the most successful with a history of, now, over eighty years. In a country as large as the USA, it was felt that working dog people should start to carve their own path, not as a substitution for VPG or IPO, but as a supplement to those programs. The challenge then is not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, but to look at the current international working dog titles and see if we could add something that has been missed or dropped from this historical development. AWDF formed a rule committee that spent several years consulting with breeders, competitors and trainers from all over this country and Europe. The consensus was to start with the current IPO rules which are the foundation for the changes I describe. At first impression, the changes may not seem that significant to many and that is the point. Instead of changing the wallpaper, the committee created specific goals and let the rule changes address those goals. And what were these goals? To make the competitions more fun and distinguish each title’s requirements as much as possible while still preserving the basic test. Return to the idea of Schutzhund being more of a temperament test. There is no question that over the past ten years, there has been a great deal of pressure to bring more control into Schutzhund while paying less attention to its primary purpose, a test of the fundamental character of the dog. Certainly, over the years, Schutzhund has become something more than a pure temperament test with competitions, recreation and dog training sharing the rewards. But the undercurrent of understanding the dog for the good of future generations of working dogs was always primary. Offer an opportunity for younger or starting people to get their feet wet through a program that balances the challenge of training with rules that don’t disqualify a team for sometimes the smallest infractions. This lack of balance has led to many starting people leaving Schutzhund because it is too hard or unfair. It is hoped that a better balanced program will lead to a greater interest in training and breeding the true working dog. Lastly, the AWDF program offers an independent view of what the test of the working dog should be. With things going as they have over several years in Europe, many in this country have felt we are being held hostage by Europe’s political views and humane laws. This new program gives America a choice, at any time, to offer an alternative to Americans who may be turned away by matters outside our control. The Program The program, like Schutzhund, is broken into three titles: AWD I, AWD II and AWD III. Its heart is the IPO working dog program, but there are some significant differences. The result should be that current judges and competitors can make the transition without major heartburn. With some important exceptions, the point allocations are almost identical. AWD I Tracking is the same as the current rules except the judge can configure the track pattern without requiring different patterns for each dog. The articles are larger than currently required. Obedience has some significant changes. The BH is eliminated as a requirement for the AWD I, but on-lead heeling is reintroduced. The wall has been eliminated and the points formally allocated to the wall have been moved to on-lead heeling. The reason for taking out the wall is to protect the safety of young and older, aged class dogs. Protection has one major rules change, the reintroduction of the attack on handler. This exercise goes back to the early days of Schutzhund and was broadly requested by many of the people who were questioned about what should go into the new rules. The rules have been tightened up a bit to avoid everything getting upside down, but it brings a different element to the AWD I, further distinguishing it from the AWD II and III. AWD II Tracking is unchanged except that we will now use one small and one larger article. Obedience is unchanged from the current IPO rules. Protection, on the other hand, takes a very different path. How to make the exercise different while still using a time tested idea was the challenge. The answer rested in going to the police titles, the DPO, and looking at one exercise where two helpers are used. Under the new rules, there will be an escape, but instead of a reattack, the handler picks up the dog and does a rear transport past a nearby blind that holds a second helper. As they pass the blind, the second helper attacks the handler and the dog is expected to leave the rear transport and defend against the second helper. After a rear transport of both helpers to the judge, the courage test follows. This is a nice transitional device from the attack on handler in AWD I to the reattack in AWD III. It is different, time tested and further distinguishes the challenges at each title level. AWD III There are no changes from the IPO rules at this level except in tracking. Instead of the usual articles, “real life” evidence types of articles will be used. These would include evidence parcels, toy guns, knives, small clothing articles, etc. There is really no restriction except as to size. Overall Changes Perhaps the greatest changes from the IPO rules in the new AWD rules are philosophical. The idea of bringing back more emphasis to temperament and giving competitors a better chance of finishing the trial, without being disqualified, is reflected in how the judging is changed. A team is now required to have a minimum score of 80 points in protection to pass. This is a return to the old Schutzhund weighing of the protection score, believed by many breeders to be the most telling part of the overall test. Courage and hardness return as a part of the judge’s evaluation of the temperament of the dog. It is not incorporated into the score, as in past times, but rated from 1 to 10 along with the usual rating of “pronounced, sufficient or insufficient” as is currently the rule. So a score book entry might show: “pronounced/9.5”. It was felt that this is one more bit of information that breeders could find valuable in determining the qualities of an individual dog. Calm bites are no longer a part of the judge’s evaluation of either performance or temperament. One significant change is on the outs. A handler is given two opportunities to out the dog from a distance. If the dog doesn’t out, the handler can approach the dog to within a few feet and give a third command. If the dog outs, the trial continues. If not, the dog is excused. This is another example where the rules are encouraging the judges to allow a hander to complete the trial. The score may be terrible, but the handler gets to finish. As you wade through the some 38 pages of trial rules, keep these central points in mind. I hope you will find, like me, they will bring back some of the fun of working dog events and a better understanding of the dog we are watching.