Dogs are not pack animals??? - Page 7

Catu · 09-07-2010, 01:07 PM

I believe my dog would.

trish07 · 09-07-2010, 04:25 PM

I think dogs can form pack for sure, but not in the same way as wolves for example.

I've heard a similar theory before which I think it's not entirely false. In my opinion, dogs are opportunists. It's normal for a group of wild dogs to form a pack in dangerous or poor food areas to increase their chances of survival.

You rarely see packs of dogs in Montreal, New York, Chicago etc. because they can barely get everything they want on their own. In bigger areas like deserts (mexico), forests etc. it is more common to see 2, 3 or more wild dogs together.

I think dogs know well how to adapte theirselves to situations and this is why I think dogs are different than wolves or pack of wolves.

Good_Karma · 09-08-2010, 06:54 AM

Looks like "Darcie" noticed.

Dominate, pack or not? | The Dish by Darcie

Excerpt:
Dear Darcie, You’re famous. I see that The Dish by Darcie about crates and dog packs made it all over the Net including FB and breed sites. I found it most interesting that the people who have what they refer to as power breeds, GSDs especially, were most aggressive in their objection to your suggestion that dogs are not pack animals by nature when left to themselves and in fact were adamant that dogs are pack animals and their own human style of dominance leads the way. People who live with smaller dogs like Bichons and other toy breeds were more likely adamantly against using a crate to train or as a bed for a dog. Care to comment? – Maddie

Dear Maddie, I noticed that, too.

I have to say that the comment which still sticks with me as really scary was from the person who said they rescue highly aggressive GSDs. Their cure and behavior training for that aggression is to “alpha roll” the dog in front of another GSD. This they believe is making the aggressive dog submit to the other and thus the first will be less aggressive and less dominant in the pack. That’s not what an alpha roll is even at it’s best definition but this is what scares me about the comment. This person says the dogs they keep are so dangerous that they have to be managed constantly, they believe that no one else can handle them. Is there anything in this description of what this person is doing that sounds safe or that it’s working at all to calm these dogs or change behavior? It sounds to me that the dogs are not only not calming, they are getting worse. This person is creating time bombs. It’s only a matter of time before they, someone else, or one of the dogs is going to be badly hurt. Then a dog or more will have to be killed by a judge’s order. The thinking behind this type of management is nuts, in my opinion. If you’re doing something to a dog and it doesn’t work to create a happier dog, stop!

The person who is rolling the dogs is a bully. They don’t understand dogs and one day it will come back to bite them. My best hope is that this person has people to support them when the final day of their bullying comes. I hope it’s not the dogs who turn on the bully. That will be very, very bad.

The crate thing. It’s okay. Nobody has to crate if they don’t want to. It’s not just people who have little dogs who think like that but you’re right, the majority of those who were against crates had smaller dogs. I personally like my dogs to be used to anything and everything, crates and muzzles included. That way because of the kindness in the training, nothing scares them should the strange, odd, or worst happen to me or to them.

If being quoted so people can have deep discussions about something I’ve said makes me famous, I guess I am. Thanks for the laughter. I appreciate it very much.

I did read much of what was floating around out there. The majority of the comments were fair, thoughtful, and calmly written. A few brought in the aspect of racism which I thought was really a strange twist to the subject of what’s a dominant or alpha dog and what’s a pack. It happened right here at The Dish, too. I stopped it cold as did most of the other boards. It’s always good to know that the fringe is still the fringe. – Darcie

DogGone · 09-18-2010, 02:02 PM

I just stumbled on this today. Security footage of a dog pack attacking a janitor.

You Tube

You Tube

Yet the so-called "experts" tell us that allegedly "facts" prove dogs are not pack animals.

kearanentalo · 09-19-2010, 12:04 PM

I live with 8 shepherds in my HOUSE. Let me tell you about pack drive and instinct! And as for humans being a part of the pack, dogs cannot relate to humans any differently than what their DNA is programmed to relate. From personal experience with over 5,000 dogs that have had problem behaviors, once a "leadership" program is implemented (consistently by the owner), the problem behaviors disappear or improve dramatically. 100% of the time. The "leadership" philosophy is based on the "pack drive". Some dogs have more "pack drive" than others, just like some dogs have more "food drive" than other or more "hunt drive" than others. I suspect that this author has probably not had enough experience with dogs that DO have higher levels of "pack drive". This explains why some dogs are more interested in being social than others. But, it does NOT mean that dogs are not "pack animals".

AgileGSD · 09-19-2010, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kearanentalo

I live with 8 shepherds in my HOUSE. Let me tell you about pack drive and instinct! And as for humans being a part of the pack, dogs cannot relate to humans any differently than what their DNA is programmed to relate. From personal experience with over 5,000 dogs that have had problem behaviors, once a "leadership" program is implemented (consistently by the owner), the problem behaviors disappear or improve dramatically. 100% of the time. The "leadership" philosophy is based on the "pack drive". Some dogs have more "pack drive" than others, just like some dogs have more "food drive" than other or more "hunt drive" than others. I suspect that this author has probably not had enough experience with dogs that DO have higher levels of "pack drive". This explains why some dogs are more interested in being social than others. But, it does NOT mean that dogs are not "pack animals".

I believe the author has Belgians, certainly not an independent breed.

I have a multi-dog household that consists of GSDs, Belgians and one corgi. Belgians are IMO a bit more "primitive" acting than GSDs. They retain a lot of wild type behaviors such as a tendency towards resource guarding, caching food and objects and tend to be quicker to react to their environment. But they are also typical of herding breeds - very biddable and closely bonded to their people. I have also worked at a doggy daycare which involved daily management of groups of up to 30 or so dogs, all free together all day.

Dogs are certainly social animals and certainly develop relationships with other dogs in the house. But the idea of there being an "alpha" or sole "pack leader" is over simplified and IMO off base. Things are much more fluid with dog to dog interactions. Leadership programs do work because they set up an environment where the owner is consistent with training and management. Most dog's behavior issues do not stem from "dominance" but from normal, often self reinforcing dog behavior that humans don't care for.

Good_Karma · 09-19-2010, 04:03 PM

If we accept the original theory in this thread, that dogs are not pack animals, how can we explain behavior like that video (which I didn't watch, but I can imagine)? Understandably, dogs will get together to increase mating success. But why gather for activities like running down prey, or defending territory, unless the dogs as pack animals theory is true? Is such a gathering only a temporary occurrence?

Perhaps it comes down to how one defines "pack".

GSD Fan · 09-20-2010, 11:41 AM

Um, from experience, I believe dogs are pack animals. They just tend to act more destructive if not socialized or with the family. Then again, maybe that's because there's nothing to do and not because they are lonely. Now some dogs are more . . . unpack than others.

I firmly believe it is more healthy for a dog to be with his or her family than to be without them.

Then again, I'm not a dog expert.

adriaticum · 05-14-2012, 02:33 AM

Dogs do originate from a pack ancestor, wolf. Even though they have slaved to us for 14,000 years I believe they still have the basic pack instinct. If left alone a bunch of dogs will not create a hierarchical society like wolves have but left alone for extended periods of time and generations they probably will establish some sort of an order in the group. This is evident in instances where dogs live with weak/soft humans. They always take the leadership role if left unchallenged.

codmaster · 05-14-2012, 02:54 AM

[QUOTE=adriaticum;2482158]Dogs do originate from a pack ancestor, wolf. Even though they have slaved to us for 14,000 years I believe they still have the basic pack instinct. If left alone a bunch of dogs will not create a hierarchical society like wolves have but left alone for extended periods of time and generations they probably will establish some sort of an order in the group. This is evident in instances where dogs live with weak/soft humans. They always take the leadership role if left unchallenged.[/QUOTE]

What are you basing your statement on? And what do you mean by "left unchallenged"?

Do you mean that every single dog will act this same way?

You include Seeing/Eye dogs also and all Therapy dogs as well?

What is a "weak/soft" human? Is it physical or mental or health or ?????

09-07-2010, 01:07 PM	#61 (permalink)
Catu Crowned Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Valdivia, Chile Posts: 4,270	I believe my dog would. __________________ "The dog does not need to be deranked so much as the people need to learn to act like people worth listening to" Suzanne Clothier. Diabla, my Daemon; SchH A, RH-T A Akela, my Direwolf; Work in Progress Bagheera, Long term puppy host

09-07-2010, 04:25 PM	#62 (permalink)
trish07 Master Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 999	I think dogs can form pack for sure, but not in the same way as wolves for example. I've heard a similar theory before which I think it's not entirely false. In my opinion, dogs are opportunists. It's normal for a group of wild dogs to form a pack in dangerous or poor food areas to increase their chances of survival. You rarely see packs of dogs in Montreal, New York, Chicago etc. because they can barely get everything they want on their own. In bigger areas like deserts (mexico), forests etc. it is more common to see 2, 3 or more wild dogs together. I think dogs know well how to adapte theirselves to situations and this is why I think dogs are different than wolves or pack of wolves. Last edited by trish07; 09-07-2010 at 04:32 PM.

09-08-2010, 06:54 AM	#63 (permalink)
Good_Karma Crowned Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Upstate, NY Posts: 4,103	Well, this is interesting... Looks like "Darcie" noticed. Dominate, pack or not? \| The Dish by Darcie Excerpt: Dear Darcie, You’re famous. I see that The Dish by Darcie about crates and dog packs made it all over the Net including FB and breed sites. I found it most interesting that the people who have what they refer to as power breeds, GSDs especially, were most aggressive in their objection to your suggestion that dogs are not pack animals by nature when left to themselves and in fact were adamant that dogs are pack animals and their own human style of dominance leads the way. People who live with smaller dogs like Bichons and other toy breeds were more likely adamantly against using a crate to train or as a bed for a dog. Care to comment? – Maddie Dear Maddie, I noticed that, too. I have to say that the comment which still sticks with me as really scary was from the person who said they rescue highly aggressive GSDs. Their cure and behavior training for that aggression is to “alpha roll” the dog in front of another GSD. This they believe is making the aggressive dog submit to the other and thus the first will be less aggressive and less dominant in the pack. That’s not what an alpha roll is even at it’s best definition but this is what scares me about the comment. This person says the dogs they keep are so dangerous that they have to be managed constantly, they believe that no one else can handle them. Is there anything in this description of what this person is doing that sounds safe or that it’s working at all to calm these dogs or change behavior? It sounds to me that the dogs are not only not calming, they are getting worse. This person is creating time bombs. It’s only a matter of time before they, someone else, or one of the dogs is going to be badly hurt. Then a dog or more will have to be killed by a judge’s order. The thinking behind this type of management is nuts, in my opinion. If you’re doing something to a dog and it doesn’t work to create a happier dog, stop! The person who is rolling the dogs is a bully. They don’t understand dogs and one day it will come back to bite them. My best hope is that this person has people to support them when the final day of their bullying comes. I hope it’s not the dogs who turn on the bully. That will be very, very bad. The crate thing. It’s okay. Nobody has to crate if they don’t want to. It’s not just people who have little dogs who think like that but you’re right, the majority of those who were against crates had smaller dogs. I personally like my dogs to be used to anything and everything, crates and muzzles included. That way because of the kindness in the training, nothing scares them should the strange, odd, or worst happen to me or to them. If being quoted so people can have deep discussions about something I’ve said makes me famous, I guess I am. Thanks for the laughter. I appreciate it very much. I did read much of what was floating around out there. The majority of the comments were fair, thoughtful, and calmly written. A few brought in the aspect of racism which I thought was really a strange twist to the subject of what’s a dominant or alpha dog and what’s a pack. It happened right here at The Dish, too. I stopped it cold as did most of the other boards. It’s always good to know that the fringe is still the fringe. – Darcie __________________ Leah: Newbie dog owner Niko: American Showline GSD 2 1/2 years old Rosa: American Muppet Dog (GSD/Border Collie mix) 3 years old

09-19-2010, 04:03 PM	#67 (permalink)
Good_Karma Crowned Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Upstate, NY Posts: 4,103	If we accept the original theory in this thread, that dogs are not pack animals, how can we explain behavior like that video (which I didn't watch, but I can imagine)? Understandably, dogs will get together to increase mating success. But why gather for activities like running down prey, or defending territory, unless the dogs as pack animals theory is true? Is such a gathering only a temporary occurrence? Perhaps it comes down to how one defines "pack". __________________ Leah: Newbie dog owner Niko: American Showline GSD 2 1/2 years old Rosa: American Muppet Dog (GSD/Border Collie mix) 3 years old

09-19-2010, 12:04 PM	#65 (permalink)
kearanentalo Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 57	I live with 8 shepherds in my HOUSE. Let me tell you about pack drive and instinct! And as for humans being a part of the pack, dogs cannot relate to humans any differently than what their DNA is programmed to relate. From personal experience with over 5,000 dogs that have had problem behaviors, once a "leadership" program is implemented (consistently by the owner), the problem behaviors disappear or improve dramatically. 100% of the time. The "leadership" philosophy is based on the "pack drive". Some dogs have more "pack drive" than others, just like some dogs have more "food drive" than other or more "hunt drive" than others. I suspect that this author has probably not had enough experience with dogs that DO have higher levels of "pack drive". This explains why some dogs are more interested in being social than others. But, it does NOT mean that dogs are not "pack animals".

09-20-2010, 11:41 AM	#68 (permalink)
GSD Fan Elite Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: MS Posts: 1,128	Um, from experience, I believe dogs are pack animals. They just tend to act more destructive if not socialized or with the family. Then again, maybe that's because there's nothing to do and not because they are lonely. Now some dogs are more . . . unpack than others. I firmly believe it is more healthy for a dog to be with his or her family than to be without them. Then again, I'm not a dog expert.

05-14-2012, 02:33 AM	#69 (permalink)
adriaticum New Member Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1	Dogs do originate from a pack ancestor, wolf. Even though they have slaved to us for 14,000 years I believe they still have the basic pack instinct. If left alone a bunch of dogs will not create a hierarchical society like wolves have but left alone for extended periods of time and generations they probably will establish some sort of an order in the group. This is evident in instances where dogs live with weak/soft humans. They always take the leadership role if left unchallenged.

05-14-2012, 02:54 AM	#70 (permalink)
codmaster Crowned Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: California, US Posts: 4,767	[QUOTE=adriaticum;2482158]Dogs do originate from a pack ancestor, wolf. Even though they have slaved to us for 14,000 years I believe they still have the basic pack instinct. If left alone a bunch of dogs will not create a hierarchical society like wolves have but left alone for extended periods of time and generations they probably will establish some sort of an order in the group. This is evident in instances where dogs live with weak/soft humans. They always take the leadership role if left unchallenged.[/QUOTE] What are you basing your statement on? And what do you mean by "left unchallenged"? Do you mean that every single dog will act this same way? You include Seeing/Eye dogs also and all Therapy dogs as well? What is a "weak/soft" human? Is it physical or mental or health or ?????

Remove Advertisements Sponsored Links
German Shepherd Advertisement