I agree with Bear Foot about 95% on this, and I think the other 5% is probably just a difference in symantics.
Our LGD doesn't guard the goats, nor the chickens, nor his territory per se...he guards himself. Everything around him is effectively under guard by simple virtue of the fact that he's around it. Were he to be in the same enclosure alone...no goats, no chickens...and strange dogs or people approached the gate, he'd run to the gate and greet them with a menacing display.
Now, the reason I bring up the symantics is because I know some folks call that temperament "territoriality." And, frankly, when you see a LGD patrol a fenceline or run to the gate to challenge a threat, it's difficult to argue over whether it's a result of a wary dog with fear-aggressive tendencies or straight-up territoriality. More importantly, the difference wouldn't amount to a hill of beans anyway -- the end result is exactly the same. In other words...who cares?!?
Make no mistake, though...In my opinion, Bear's absolutely right in expressing the notion that effective livestock guardianship temperament doesn't carry with it the requirement for the dog to believe itself a lamb, sheep, goat, calf, chicken, or any other livestock animal. What it requires, in short, is to be wary and alert, fear-aggressive and/or territorial, and to have a completely arrested prey drive. That's it.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say that a true LGD should have the capability of being set loose in a junkyard to guard salvaged cars and be equally effective as it would be guarding goats, chickens, cattle, or anything else..
Ivan would, for sure. No doubt in my mind.
I have a feeling Bear Foot's Maremmas would, too..
Am I right, Bear?
