Critique of “The New Knowledge of Dog Behavior, by Clarence Pfaffenberger

Yesterday after reading the first 85 pages of “The New Knowledge of Dog Behavior” I was not very impressed with the book. I bought it to learn about dog behavior and a significant portion of the first 85 pages where devoted to the life history of the author. Personally I think these 85 pages could have been condensed in a couple of pages and included as a forward. The experience and education of the author is useful information, but 85 pages are, in my opinion, excessive and I nearly ditched the book for a more interesting read.

The book sped up at page 87 and was so interesting I could not put it down until I was done. It was a fascinating and educational read but I have to wonder if the findings still hold true after 45 years since publication. I will have to investigate this further. My other concern is that the Author's studies were motivated by the desire to produce excellent guide dogs and although the 4 stages of critical development are true for all dog species, I suspect the test he does for guide dogs would be significantly different for other working dogs like PPD, SAR, Shcutzhund, ASR etc…

It was neat that he was able to determine that dogs that possess the natural desire to “retrieve” prove to be dogs that have the strong desire and willingness to please their owner, which is an important trait for a GD and was the single most notable test administered to indicate whether a dog would become a suitable guide dog.

It was interesting that he was able to determine that dogs that initially tested well did not go on to pass the training if they were deprived socialization after 12 weeks when the preliminary tests were concluded.

I found it disheartening that a puppy raised with its mother to adulthood could never be successfully train as a GD… I would assume that would carry over to other fields of work. Since I am keeping a puppy for training, I have to wonder if my puppy is doomed from the start just because the pup will be raised with his mother.

The author explains that a dog needs to “learn to learn” in the first 4 months and if learning and socialization are deprived during this time, the dog has almost no chance of success even as a family pet.

I have a far better understanding of linebreeding now and how genetics play a huge roll in determining the success of a dog however; even the most genetically superior dog will fail if it is not properly raised during the first 4 months. According to the book once this window is closed there is no going back and the dogs natural abilities are forever retarded.

Overall the book was great…I learned a lot about the 4 critical stages of dog development, all which occur in the first 16 weeks of life, and the things you should do with the puppy to maximize it’s learning capabilities, but I have to wonder if further research over the last 45 years has changed any of the findings in anyway?

If all the research that was discovered back in 1960 still holds true, I would highly recommend the book