• Welcome to the Dachshund Forums. Member registration disables ads and allows you to post and share.

Forget About Being Alpha In Your Pack

PrettyPenny

New Member
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
52
Pets
Penny and Chevelle and Baloo
Has Ceasar Milan encouraged you to be your dogs "alpha"? If so, read this article. It explains why recent discoveries in dog behavior have found the dominance theory to be ineffective at best, and why positive reinforcement based training is the best way to go with every dog, every time.

http://www.kathysdao.com/articles/Forget_About_Being_Alpha_in_Your_Pack.html

Forget About Being Alpha in Your Pack

by Kathy Sdao, MA, CAAB
All Rights Reserved
In their recent book “Made to Stick,” Chip and Dan Heath detail the characteristics that make an idea or explanation “sticky.” According to their analysis, stories that are simple, unexpected, and concrete capture our imagination and get lodged in our brains. Many urban myths, they point out, are ideal examples of this phenomenon.

One perfect example of a “sticky” story is the ever-popular notion that dogs are essentially domesticated wolves who view their human companions as members of their hierarchical pack. This story is simple (pack structure is presumably a clear-cut ranking of alpha, beta and omega animals), unexpected (imagine having the descendent of a wild wolf right in our living rooms!), and concrete (who hasn’t seen TV footage of a wolf pack chasing down a moose or elk?). So sticky is this canine urban myth, in fact, that it refuses to die, despite the series of inaccuracies at its core.

Unfortunately, both dogs and their owners suffer the consequences of this fable, for it is from this story that we get the popular but unfounded training decree that humans must be “alpha” in their mixed-species pack.

Allow me to set the record straight. Here are just a few of the inaccuracies embedded in the “dog as domesticated wolf” story.

Myth 1: Wild wolves form hierarchical packs in which individuals vie for dominance.

Not always. And maybe not even very often. It turns out this common assumption about the social dynamics of wolves is based on studies of captive animals whose group structure was non-natural (i.e., the wolves came from various locations and lineages). After a broad review of the scientific literature and thirteen summers spent observing free-living wolves on an island in the Northwest Territories in Canada, wolf ethologist L. David Mech concluded that social interactions among wolf-pack members are nearly identical to those among members of any other group of related individuals. In essence, the typical wolf pack is a family in which parents guide activities of younger members. Vying for dominance in the pack hierarchy is not a priority. Care-taking and teaching of younger pack members by adults is.

Myth 2: Dogs, close relatives of wolves, must also form packs in which individuals vie for dominance.

It is true that there is virtually no difference in the genetic material of dogs and wolves, or of dogs and coyotes or jackals, for that matter. But, from an ecological perspective, dogs and wolves are indeed distinct species because they are adapted to different niches. That is, they earn their livings in different ways. Wolves kill large prey, while dogs live in partnership with humans.

Recent research regarding the evolution of dogs indicates that this partnership did not occur as a result of our human ancestors’ attempts to tame wild wolves to be guard animals or hunting companions. It appears much more likely that dogs evolved from a wolf-like ancestor not through artificial selection by humans but from a process of natural selection filling a new ecological niche. That niche was the town dump, which first appeared approximately 15,000 years ago, at the end of the last Ice Age. This is when humans began creating permanent villages. Wolves found a new food source: they could forage on the waste products in the refuse piles. The individual wolves who were able to continue eating even when humans approached were at a reproductive advantage. In other words, the less skittish wolves, the “tamer” ones who didn’t flee at the first indication of a nearby human, ate more. Over many generations, this produced the behavioral quality that most distinguishes dogs from wolves: dogs will approach rather than avoid humans.

This version of dog evolution, starring the proto-dog as a scavenger of human waste at village dump sites (think “large rat”), is surely less sexy than proto-dog as noble wolf tamed by clever ancient humans. But it’s essential for our modern view of dog-training because scavenging “village dogs” don’t have a pack structure at all. They don’t hunt cooperatively. Other dogs are competitors, not helpers, in finding edible garbage. And so they live alone or in groups of two or three.

Myth 3: Dogs incorporate humans into their view of pack hierarchies.

Despite data to the contrary, many people still believe dogs form linear hierarchies of alpha (dominant) and omega (submissive) individuals. Many trainers have capitalized on this belief system by arguing that you can solve behavior problems in your dog only when you have established yourself as Alpha dog among the pack of creatures in your home (people and dogs). And so many folks waste time complying with irrelevant rules (e.g., “always eat your meals before your dogs eat theirs”) when they instead could be using that time and effort to conduct simple effective training (e.g., rewarding desired behaviors). Often they also use physical force, such as shaking the dog by the scruff of the neck, pinning him on his back, or grabbing his muzzle – all because they’ve heard these are methods alpha-ranked wolves use to discipline subordinates.

But even if dogs did form linear packs, there’s no evidence to suggest that they perceive humans as part of their species-specific ranking. In general, humans lack the capability to even recognize, let alone replicate, the elegant subtleties of canine body language. So it’s hard to imagine that dogs could perceive us as pack members at all.

Maybe we need a new sticky story. Dogs are lovable scavengers. Their evolution has made them dependent on humans to provide food. This concept of humans as feeders, rather than as “leaders of the pack” forms the foundation for a logical, reward-based approach to dog-training. And since even wolves organize themselves into family units, we can aspire not to be dominant pack leaders, but good “parents” instead, that is, excellent care-takers and teachers of our dependent dogs.

[If you’re interested in learning more, check out this fascinating book: Dogs: A New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior, and Evolution, 2001, by Ray & Lorna Coppinger, University of Chicago Press]


© 2008 Kathy Sdao, Tacoma, Washinton. All rights reserved. Last Update: 4/15/2012
Website Maintenance by Aldebaran Web Design Seattle
 
I think that you have to be the pack leader and it has nothing to do with Cesar. And you also have to use positive reinforcement. It's just common sense.. Everyday I see dogs that have been pampered with only the positive and they walk over their owners when ever they can - and they're not happy. At least the dogs I know want someone to tell them the rules. Being the pack leader doesn't mean that you punish your dog or that you're aggressive, it means that you're the Boss. :)
 
Being the boss isn't being a "pack leader". Because they are two different things. Most of my dogs are trained with positive reinforcement only and they do not "walk all over me". A dog that walks all over it's owner doesn't mean a thing about positive training....it means that the person training doesn't know how to train.
 
the pack leader in my family is my boyfriend, the dog will eat and wait until my boyfriend had eaten until he can eat. he doesn't go through a door before him and the dog dominates the cat :)
 
The concept is good, but the info on how dogs were domesticated is wrong. Dogs have been domesticated for 40 000 years or more, according to recent research, and infact tame wolves could very well have lived among the neanderthals.

I do not believe in the pack theory. My dogs have rules, and follow them, but there is no such thing as linear hierarchy in dogs, and they truly do not thing humans are furless, bipedal dogs, and to think that is ridiculous.
 
Sorry Penny, I highly disagree with this theory ..... No way. My dog knows I am the boss and I will continue to show him dominance. People have dominance over him and he has been trained that way since day one. If I lack to show him dominance he pushes the limit and becomes dominant and somewhat snappy and full of attitude. BAD bad BAD idea to not show that you are the pack leader and dominant one to your dog!!
 
My dogs sit at doors and wait until I give them the "ok" to walk through. They lay down and wait for their food, "ask" to come up on the bed (by laying down) and sit for petting and attention. This has nothing to do with me "dominating" them. I choose which rules I want followed, and then train them using positive reinforcement. It takes patience, but you end up with dogs that trust you. This is so important, especially if you have fearful dogs like I do. I get comments all the time about my older dog, who will do anything I ask of her because she trusts me, and is used to being rewarded. She will turn on a dime to return to me when I call-from chasing a rabbit! She has never growled or nipped at me, because I've always respected her comfort levels and worked within those. I could go on and on, I'm quite passionate about this. The bottom line is, you absolutely will have a better relationship with your dogs when you learn about their body language and communication signals, and start listening to them.
 
My dogs sit at doors and wait until I give them the "ok" to walk through. They lay down and wait for their food, "ask" to come up on the bed (by laying down) and sit for petting and attention. This has nothing to do with me "dominating" them. I choose which rules I want followed, and then train them using positive reinforcement. It takes patience, but you end up with dogs that trust you. This is so important, especially if you have fearful dogs like I do. I get comments all the time about my older dog, who will do anything I ask of her because she trusts me, and is used to being rewarded. She will turn on a dime to return to me when I call-from chasing a rabbit! She has never growled or nipped at me, because I've always respected her comfort levels and worked within those. I could go on and on, I'm quite passionate about this. The bottom line is, you absolutely will have a better relationship with your dogs when you learn about their body language and communication signals, and start listening to them.

No offense but everything you just said is actions of dominance over your dogs. You make them wait until you go through the door? That is a dominant behavior you are exhibiting to them. You make them ask you for food, You are telling them you are in charge of their food. Owners HAVE To show dominance over their dogs in some ways, if you didn't you wouldn't be the dogs owner you would be a dog?
 
No offense taken:)

I was referring to dominance the way that Cesar Milan talks about it. He perpetuates the myth that almost everything our dogs do is somehow an attempt to take over our position in "the pack" and therefore it's necessary to exert our "dominance" over them by making sure we eat first, walk ahead of them, and physically force them to do things.

When you watch shows like the Dog Whisperer, it is apparent that most of the dogs are stressed and/or frightened. Instead of teaching them what he wants them to do, he uses intimidation and pain to force them.

My dogs always have a choice. If they choose to ignore a cue, they don't get punished, except sometimes for negative punishment (removal of what they like). Because they were heavily reinforced for obedience in the training stage (I used their food to train them) they almost always choose to obey. With "dominance" training, animals often become snappy out of frustration, or they only obey while the threat of pain exists (for example, dogs who learn not to bark only while the bark collar is on).

There is the thought that dogs trained without force "walk all over their owners" and my example of some of the rules my dogs follow shows that "positive" does not mean "permissive"
 
I also wanted to clarify:

I train for what I want because it is my house and I set the rules. Teaching my dogs what I want from them helps them feel confident and happy.

They sit and wait at doors, not because I need to stay ahead of them lest my position as "alpha" be usurped, but because it's dangerous to have dogs bolting out of doors, especially onto city streets. Waiting for food promotes self-control, which prevents them from jumping and nipping at visiting children who are often holding food at my dogs' eye-level. "Asking" to come up on furniture prevents coffee/wine spills from dogs leaping into laps.

It's pretty obvious to our dogs that we are not dogs! And it's also obvious we hold all the good stuff (food, access to outside, etc.) so there's no need to assert our "dominance" through rituals like alpha-rolling, pinning or scruffing. Those things only confuse and stress our dogs.

Most of what people see as stubbornness or "attitude" in their pets is just a lack of training (some is actual attitude, because these are Doxies after all!). My younger girl was a nightmare to housetrain. She constantly peed in the house, not because she was resentful or trying to get back at me, but because she found it easier than going outside in the cold. It was my job to make going outside more rewarding, and to give her more chances to succeed and few, if any chances to fail. She eventually got it, and is fastidious about going outside now.
 
I was HUGE fan on CM and dominance training.Now I'm kinda ashamed of what I did. I even ate from my dogs bowls.I made them frustrated in many ways.The first dog I had obviously was not happy with me.She now lives with my mother and she is a totally different dog now and she avoids me,sad but true.Dominance did no good to her.I did alpha-rolls,scruffing and such. There is a HUGE difference with those dogs who are trained positively.They trust me,they are lively,happy,active and they would never change me to anyone else,yes they have some people they like a lot,but they will still chose me over them,Nelly very often chose other people over me,because she didn't have experience with them "dominating" her
 
Back
Top