April 19, 2025, 9:23 am | Read time: 8 minutes
Since April 15, the so-called protection dog sport has been banned for private individuals in Austria. An emotional video by dog trainer Martin Rütter stirred up the topic in Germany as well. Several dog experts, such as canine psychologist Marc Ebersbach, publicly oppose a blanket ban on protection dog sports in Germany.
Since mid-April, all forms of dog training that “promote aggressive behaviors such as biting or attack behavior” have been banned in our neighboring country Austria.1 In short: Private individuals in Austria are prohibited from practicing the so-called protection dog sport. This is a sport for four-legged friends and their handlers, which may sometimes seem a bit rough but is fundamentally intended to follow good intentions, according to supporters. Experts weigh in on the ban on protection dog sports below.
The aim of protection dog sports is to challenge both the dog and the handler physically and mentally. The components of tracking, obedience, and protection work are meant to merge into a unit, elevating the dog’s obedience, instinctual confidence, resilience, and teamwork to a higher level. In recent weeks, the topic has also heated up here, and after a video by dog trainer Martin Rütter, there have been calls for a ban in Germany. Dog psychologist Marc Ebersbach takes a more nuanced view and spoke with PETBOOK about protection dog sport, the controversy, and Martin Rütter.
“Martin Rütter Is Now Accused of Not Arguing in a Differentiated Manner”
PETBOOK: Why is the topic of a possible ban on protection dog sport currently so heated?
Marc Ebersbach: “The debate was reignited because Austria banned protection dog sport for private individuals. Martin Rütter picked up on this topic and released an emotional video in which he broadly criticizes protection dog sport and its operators. A quote from him roughly states: ‘It’s only about demonstrating power over the dog.’ This blanket condemnation has affected many. He is now accused of not arguing in a differentiated manner, essentially mixing apples and oranges. That’s why the topic is so present right now. It might also be so heated because the dog world is very divided here.”
What do you mean by that?
“If we look at dog breeds, we have breeds that are under low tension and breeds that are under relatively high tension. For example, Labradors or all types of retrievers are under low tension. They are simply more cool and laid-back. Then there are dogs with high tension or a generally higher level of tension—such as Malinois or Herder. These dogs have a high activity level and strong forward-directed work instincts.
The Fronts Are Hardened
These different prerequisites lead to very different approaches in handling and training. And they lead to a pronounced question: Why do I even get such a dog? And what do I do to at least mentally engage him and control his instincts, which have been given to him through breeding? One side cannot understand the other. It’s almost like two cultures that fundamentally don’t understand each other and also can’t relate to the other’s question of why one lives the way one does. Or why one does things the way one does. But this is precisely where the line of understanding runs through the dog world.”
There is a camp that accuses Martin Rütter of judging too emotionally and not based on facts. Who are these camps?
“I can’t answer that generally because I don’t have an overview of who accuses him of what exactly. But what I can say is: In the dog scene, there are different camps—and depending on the attitude towards dog training, the assessment of Martin Rütter varies.
Those who work with dogs that are under tension or show aggressive stress behavior tend not to agree with Rütter’s approach. They usually rely on controlling training that also demands clear boundaries. On the other side are all those who wish for a relaxed dog alongside humans—a dog that can simply be a dog—similar to a street dog that behaves freely and calmly. This group tends to agree with Rütter’s philosophy.
“Many Problems Martin Rütter Identifies Affect Not Only Protection Dog sport but Dog Ownership Overall”
Here runs a clear dividing line—and it somewhat runs through our country as well. I cannot say how large the respective groups are. But fundamentally, it applies: Those who work exclusively with positive methods and rely on motivation are closer to Rütter. Those who believe that a dog must also learn boundaries and control its behavioral instincts view this more critically.
What is your general stance on protection dog sport?
“I see both sides: There are very positive aspects—especially with responsible practice. However, there are also critical points, especially with exaggeration and unprofessional structures. What I find problematic about Martin Rütter’s statement is the generalization. He presents it all very one-sidedly. Many problems he identifies affect not only protection dog sport but dog ownership overall.
What do you think is necessary to address these problems?
“We need to start much more fundamentally. Who is allowed to own a dog at all? Who is allowed to own certain breeds? What qualifications are needed? Who controls this? Are the veterinary offices in their current structure even able to do this—or are regional animal welfare officers needed to take over control and advise? I really want to open a big can of worms here.”
“In My opinion, Protection Dog Sport Should Not Be Banned But More Strongly Controlled and Regulated”
Now, among others, Martin Rütter is calling for a ban on this sport. Do you think protection dog sport should be banned?
“In my opinion, it should not be banned but more strongly controlled and regulated. Generally, I can say: There is stress that the dog is familiar with, such as hunting-motivated stress. In serious training in protection dog sport, the dog is only confronted with this form of stress, as only hunting-motivated prey-catching behavior is staged and controlled. Because nothing other than prey is the arm dummy for the dog. If I were to throw away the protection arm, the dog would chase the prey—namely the arm—and no longer attack the person.
Here lies a big misunderstanding: Many believe that dogs are taught to bite. That’s nonsense, of course. I don’t have to teach a dog to bite. If he feels threatened, he either flees or attacks, depending on his personality. I don’t need to train that. In protection dog sport, we don’t have dogs that are supposed to learn to bite, but rather learn to control their instincts under stress and under the guidance of their human, making them controllable. If we can agree that it remains with this hunting-motivated stress in a moderate manner, then I am positively inclined towards protection dog sport.”
Okay, and what would speak against this sport in your opinion?
“If we say that it doesn’t remain with this hunting-motivated stress, but additional stress is added, for example, through sticks that are waved around the dog to make him ‘even more stress-resistant,’ then I see this critically and very concerning for the dog. This stress can overwhelm dogs, and therefore these methods should be banned from an animal welfare perspective and due to potential safety risks.”
Martin Rütter Sharply Criticizes Dog Protection Sport! Experts React
Why most dog trainers on TV are male
Dog Psychologist Would Advise Everyone to Spend the Bight in Nature with Their Dog
“If We Ban Protection Dog Sport, It Will Take Place Illegally in Backyards”
But I am generally not a fan of bans. Because if we ban it, it will take place illegally in backyards. More important to me is a discussion about the following questions: What is good for the dogs, and what is not good for them? So where does it stop? And the question: How can those who want to do this guarantee that it is done professionally? So who trains these people? Who sets the guidelines? Who controls their work? These are the questions that need to be asked. These need to be clarified so that the dividing line between ‘it is useful’ and ‘it is harmful’ is clearly drawn.”
In your video on this topic, you also cited a study that sparked discussions. Why?
“Exactly, I referenced a dissertation from 2006 from the University of Munich. Although it’s older, it’s the only one that really deals with training and biting incidents in a differentiated manner. Critics accuse me of that being too little—while Martin Rütter didn’t refer to any statistics at all. He simply claims that dogs from protection dog sport bite particularly often—without scientific proof. He also misinterpreted statements about stress behavior in dogs from my perspective. Now, all of this is also being discussed highly emotionally, without a clean data basis. Because there is no biting statistic that says which dog has bitten the most or which form of dog training actually brings the most dogs to bite.”