Dogs are not pack animals???

[Chicagocanine]

The thing is with wolves, previous research was not done on "natural" groups but rather on captive groups of unrelated wolves, which is quite different from how they are in the wild. The more recent research done on actual natural wolf packs has had quite different observations and results which contradict what the previous research said.

I don't think the traditional "alpha" type theory of dogs was accurate (and newer research does not support it), but that does not mean dogs are not pack animals, it just means the dynamics are not that of a strict "alpha" hierarchy.

[Chicagocanine]

Originally Posted by codmaster

Note the author! very much a Pos only type of person - it is definetly in her best interest for her view of "training" to NOT believe in the idea of a pack and a pack leader. this might have influenced her view of packs.

Why would it be in her best interest? From what I could tell on the site, she uses clicker training, which is based on learning theory. Learning theory applies to all animals, "pack" or not so it would not matter whether you believe in the idea of a pack, positive/clicker training would still be a valid method.
Actually your statement makes a lot more sense if it were applied to a believer in pack theory or a dominance-based trainer, because it would definitely be in their best interest to NOT believe the newer research done which debunks the classic description of alpha theory. Clicker training/learning theory has the same principles whether or not you believe dogs are pack animals with a strict hierarchy, but dominance-based/pack training does not.
Clicker training methods are applied all the time to other pack animal species as well as solitary species or those with other group dynamics.

[codmaster]

Originally Posted by Chicagocanine

The thing is with wolves, previous research was not done on "natural" groups but rather on captive groups of unrelated wolves, which is quite different from how they are in the wild. The more recent research done on actual natural wolf packs has had quite different observations and results which contradict what the previous research said.

I don't think the traditional "alpha" type theory of dogs was accurate (and newer research does not support it), but that does not mean dogs are not pack animals, it just means the dynamics are not that of a strict "alpha" hierarchy.

However, the original research, as you say on a group of unrelated wolves would be MUCH more like our dog packs for the most part they are unrelated dogs (not always but usually). Thus the "dominance" and "alpha" theory would in fact be more likely true wouldn't it.

If you say that the current research shows just the opposite because they used a related pack and the earlier research didn't, then that should make the original results fit our "dog packs" very nicely. thanks for the insight and correction to the thinking.


BTW, if there are no "Alpha" leaders in a wild wolf pack, are you saying that all of the adults in a pack are able to pair off and mate and raise puppies? I had heard somewhere that only the alpha pair generally raised a litter?

And do they take a vote to decide where, what and how to hunt? Again, I had heard that the alpha wolf decided these kind of things??

[codmaster]

Originally Posted by Chicagocanine

Why would it be in her best interest? From what I could tell on the site, she uses clicker training, which is based on learning theory. Learning theory applies to all animals, "pack" or not so it would not matter whether you believe in the idea of a pack, positive/clicker training would still be a valid method.
Actually your statement makes a lot more sense if it were applied to a believer in pack theory or a dominance-based trainer, because it would definitely be in their best interest to NOT believe the newer research done which debunks the classic description of alpha theory.
Why? Wouldn't dominance based training work regardless of whether the dog believes the trainer is the "Alpha"? It would have to I would think since you and a few others believe that there is no such thing as an "Alpha" and YET, certainly you would agree that dominance based training (i.e. Koehler" does work,wouldn't you?

Clicker training/learning theory has the same principles whether or not you believe dogs are pack animals with a strict hierarchy, but dominance-based/pack training does not.
Clicker training methods are applied all the time to other pack animal species as well as solitary species or those with other group dynamics.

What is "pack training" - never heard of that approach, but I bet it is interesting.

As far as clicker training for other species, that is true; wasn't that the method that they used to train the Sea World killer whales, and also elephants, etc.? I wonder why it hasn't been used with crocodiles or maybe you would know if it has?

[AgileGSD]

Originally Posted by codmaster

If you say that the current research shows just the opposite because they used a related pack and the earlier research didn't, then that should make the original results fit our "dog packs" very nicely. thanks for the insight and correction to the thinking.

Because dogs are wolves?

Originally Posted by codmaster

BTW, if there are no "Alpha" leaders in a wild wolf pack, are you saying that all of the adults in a pack are able to pair off and mate and raise puppies? I had heard somewhere that only the alpha pair generally raised a litter?And do they take a vote to decide where, what and how to hunt? Again, I had heard that the alpha wolf decided these kind of things??

Instead of basing your ideas on what you've heard, you should really check out some of the current information posted on this thread concerning wild wolf behavior. The thought that it is all about the "alpha" is very outdated thinking.

[codmaster]

Originally Posted by AgileGSD

Because dogs are wolves?

Thank you - I didn't know that they were. Just very closely related.


Instead of basing your ideas on what you've heard, you should really check out some of the current information posted on this thread concerning wild wolf behavior. The thought that it is all about the "alpha" is very outdated thinking.

So this thread is the best source of information about wild wolf behavior - thanks again!

So, then, what is "it all about".

Just a question - does your dog do what you tell him/her to do? Or does he/she make up their own mind? If he/she does what you tell them to, then regardless of what you call it - YOU ARE THE ALPHA!

If your dog(s) do not do what you tell them to, then maybe you have a "democratic pack" with no leader/Alpha. Doesn't really matter to anyone except you, does it?


if your dog was sitting or laying in the doorway or corridor that you wanted to go thru, would they move if you came walking up to them or would you just walk around them? Mine will get out of the way.

If that is not significant to you, then that is ok whatever they do.

[codmaster]

Originally Posted by AgileGSD

....
Instead of basing your ideas on what you've heard, you should really check out some of the current information posted on this thread concerning wild wolf behavior. The thought that it is all about the "alpha" is very outdated thinking.

I get it now, I should base my beliefs on what I read here rather than what I have heard and discussed with other folks!

[DogGone]

Originally Posted by AgileGSD

That means the lead male never fought for dominance but merely reproduced.

That’s but yet another false assumption. I have seen many videos of non-captive wild wolves fighting for dominance. Alpha rolling is often how they communicate and establish rank and order to prevent fighting.
　
Alpha rolling if done properly is not going to make a dog aggressive; on the contrary is likely to reduce the odds of aggression and mental instability. If you abuse your dog it very likely could become fear aggressive and mentally unstable. There needs to be dominance, discipline rules and boundaries to increase mental stability and reduce the odds of aggression. Typically people that abuse their dogs don’t go to dog parks and don’t go out into public; otherwise are likely to have problems of one sort of another; whether it be aggression or with the authorities. For the most part the dogs that I have seen that were aggressive were in public; the vast majority of them were from dogs that were not properly dominated/disciplined and did not have good rules and boundaries and or a stable fair leader. Most of the aggressive dogs I have seen have been dogs that were spoiled and/or not properly disciplined and/or didn’t have proper rules and boundaries, and/or didn’t get good exercise, and/or did not have a stable pack leader (trainer/owner). Like they say in the computer world. Junk in; junk out.

The study shows that dogs are not motivated by maintaining their place in the pecking order of their pack

Utter rubbish. They obviously didn’t have any alpha dogs in their pack. There captive dogs likely had plenty of food and shelter. Whether it be wild wolves or feral dogs; when the times get tough, rank typically gets more asserted. Higher rank means that you’re more likely to be well fed and get the choice pickings of food. Higher rank means that you’re more likely to be capable of bearing offspring and have opportunities for sex; thus more likely to be able to pass on your genes.
　
Dogs typically have many of these instincts suppressed/reduced; however the instincts are still there, just typically in a lesser form.
　
I’ve had 2 GSDs that were extremely alpha. He was a trained guard dog. The first one was alpha mainly with humans but to a lesser extent with dogs; he was a pistol; in the wrong hands he was dangerous; he had to be dominated; otherwise he was a loose cannon.
　
The other GSD was excessively dominant with other dogs but showed no desire to dominate humans. The dog had lived on the streets and was caught by animal control; the dog was too aggressive to other dogs to release to the public; so animal control gave me the dog. The dog was mean to other dogs evidently because while it was on the street it had to fight other dogs to survive and get food. That dog had to be forced into an alpha roll to submit to a new dog, otherwise he would attack from the get go. Even after the introduction he still had to be monitored for signs of building aggression. It took me about six months before he was rehabilitated enough that I felt reasonably safe to take him out in public.
　
I rescued another GSD that I wouldn’t consider alpha; but fear aggressive. It was in a black neighborhood and many of the adolescent males had racist attitudes about GSDs. They hit her with sticks and threw rocks at her and she could not escape the attacks because she was left out in the yard on the leash with no shelter; so she was very fear aggressive of young black males. It took me about a month to rehabilitate her. I had to force her to submit (alpha roll) her to adolescent black males as part of her rehabilitation. She had to learn that not all young black males are bad.
　
Alpha rolling was a very small part of their rehabilitation, but I think it was a very key component to start the ball rolling.
　
Alpha rolling properly does not hurt the dog physically or psychologically. Alpha rolling properly is roughly the equivalent of giving a toddler a timeout. It teaches who is in charge and that there are consequences to breaking the rules.

I believe in the carrot and stick method. A carrot on one end, and a stick on the other.

[Whiteshepherds]

Originally Posted by DogGone

　
Alpha rolling properly does not hurt the dog physically or psychologically. Alpha rolling properly is roughly the equivalent of giving a toddler a timeout. It teaches who is in charge and that there are consequences to breaking the rules.

No offense but that's seriously bad comparison. The correct comparison would be:
If your child misbehaves, wrap your arms around them, gently lay them on the floor and hold them until they stop squirming.

If you want your dog to have a time out, teach them to go lay on their mat, go to their crate, lay on their bed etc.

See...two entirely different methods.

[Chicagocanine]

Originally Posted by codmaster

However, the original research, as you say on a group of unrelated wolves would be MUCH more like our dog packs for the most part they are unrelated dogs (not always but usually). Thus the "dominance" and "alpha" theory would in fact be more likely true wouldn't it.

If you say that the current research shows just the opposite because they used a related pack and the earlier research didn't, then that should make the original results fit our "dog packs" very nicely. thanks for the insight and correction to the thinking.

Not really. The research being done on unrelated captive wolves was not the only issue more recent research has brought up with the older studies. They also said the behavior seen in older studies was actually misunderstood/misinterpreted, so what was reported in those studies would not be applicable there either. Additionally a captive group of adult, unrelated wolves would not be directly comparable to a dog "pack" living with people because the wolves in that situation would be out of their element and likely under a lot of stress, which would affect their behavior.
At any rate, dogs are not wolves.

Originally Posted by codmaster

BTW, if there are no "Alpha" leaders in a wild wolf pack, are you saying that all of the adults in a pack are able to pair off and mate and raise puppies? I had heard somewhere that only the alpha pair generally raised a litter?
And do they take a vote to decide where, what and how to hunt? Again, I had heard that the alpha wolf decided these kind of things??

I did not say there are no alpha/leaders in a wolf pack.
A natural (non-captive) wolf pack is usually a family group. The so-called "alpha" wolves are a mated pair who are the parents of the rest of the pack. They are not the "alpha" because they're the strongest or toughest wolves, or fought every other wolf to become alpha. They're the leaders because the rest of the pack are their offspring. Sometimes other members in a pack may raise a litter but that is less common because the pack can usually only support one litter at a time. Often, the offspring will leave the pack once they mature, and they might then find a mate and breed (and thus they become pack leaders themselves.)
As far as taking a vote, some researchers have shown that wolf packs can be "democratic" so to speak, with the pack deciding what to do as a group and the leaders following. "Alpha" wolves do not always dictate everything a pack does.

Originally Posted by DogGone

That’s but yet another false assumption. I have seen many videos of non-captive wild wolves fighting for dominance. Alpha rolling is often how they communicate and establish rank and order to prevent fighting.

Do you have any links? I would really be interested to see video of alpha rolling in a wild wolf pack.

Originally Posted by codmaster

Just a question - does your dog do what you tell him/her to do? Or does he/she make up their own mind? If he/she does what you tell them to, then regardless of what you call it - YOU ARE THE ALPHA!

You don't have to dominate a dog for them to do what you tell them to do. You have to teach them. It has nothing to do with dominance and everything to do with learning. If dogs required dominance/alphas to do what you told them to do, that would mean that learning theory did not apply to them. I am sure Skinner and Pavlov would be very interested and surprised to know that.