|
|
|
DOMINANCE: FACT or FICTION? |
|
Written by Barry Eaton
|
 Over the past few years, research has been carried out resulting in new theories as to how our pet dogs perceive us humans, particularly in a dog/owner relationship. There have been a number of books and papers that have started to dispel the idea that our pet dogs, given the chance, would try to raise their status in their human ‘pack'.
The purpose of this article is to pull some of the new research and theories together, and combined with my own ideas on the subject, produce an overview of an alternative view of ‘dominance'. In other words, do some dogs really want to raise their status within a human ‘pack'? Is it fact or fiction? I have a feeling that the end result may raise as many questions as it answers, but we need to open our minds and consider that perhaps there is an alternative view to the pack hierarchy rules and that dogs' are not plotting to overthrow mankind! My booklet ‘Dominance: Fact or Fiction' explores the subject further so I hope this article will server as a ‘taster'.
I must stress that this article questions the relationship between a domestic dog and its human family. It does not question dog-to-dog relationships whether they are in a multi-dog household or out in the park.
Origins Of The Pack Rules
Before we look at the common idea of ‘Pack Rules' affecting our domestic dog, I think it's worth considering where they originated and why people have become so obsessed with the idea that our dogs want to be dominant.
The Pack Rules, also known as a Rank Reduction Programme, are based on the social, hierarchical structure of a wolf pack, genetically handed down through the generations. In other words, if this is what a wolf would do, then that's what a dog will do. However, the behaviour between a captive wolf pack and a naturally free wolf pack are somewhat different. In a naturally free pack the Alpha male and female, now known as ‘breeders', would breed and rear their offspring and usually initiate hunting expeditions. When there are cubs to feed the breeding female and pups are reliant on the breeding male to provide food. At some stage, although the age is uncertain, many wolves will leave the pack to find a mate in order to start their own pack, therefore alleviating any social tension. According to David Mech “ in a natural wolf pack, dominance is not manifested as a pecking order and seems to have less significance than the results of studies of captive packs had applied. In a natural wolf pack, the dominance rules bear no resemblance to those of the pecking order, that of similar individuals competing for rank. ” So in a free wolf pack, ‘Alpha' does not necessarily have the same connotation as it does in a captive pack.
Further, “ dominance contests between other wolves are rare, if they exist at all .” Therefore there would be no ‘top dog' lording over the rest of the pack. Mech goes on to say, “ The typical wolf pack should be viewed as a family with the adult parents guiding the activities of the group and sharing group leadership in a division of labour… ” Females would look after the pups while the males would forage and hunt. If the kill were big enough all pack members, regardless of rank would feed together. “ If the kill were small, the breeders would eat first but if food were scarce, the pups would be fed first ”
Contrary to the family values of a naturally wild pack, wolves in a captive pack make frequent challenges to gain higher status. “ The higher the position at stake the more vigorously is the campaign conducted ”. A captive pack will have unacquainted wolves of different ages and gender brought together from different sources. In this situation a certain amount of social tension is likely to exist, particularly during the mating season. An Alpha, Beta, Omega etc. hierarchy for each gender will result with the younger, stronger members of the pack vying for the Alpha position. Under these circumstances there would be a dominant male and female, and probably frequent fights from younger wolves for higher status. Also if the captive pack is truly ‘captive' in that the pack is managed and manipulated by man, the pack will have no need to hunt as food is provided, and they have no fears of predators.
So can it be then, as there were very few free wild packs to study, the pack rules that have been applied to our dogs have come from observations of a captive wolf pack with its ever changing social structure? If, and it's a big IF, we wanted to compare our own dogs genetic behaviour with its distant cousin, surely we should be looking at the genetic behaviour of a naturally free wild pack, rather than the adapted behaviour of a captive pack. So have we been barking up the wrong tree all these years?
Not only could we have been comparing our dogs behaviour to that of a captive pack instead of a wild pack, perhaps we should have been asking whether we should be comparing our dogs behaviour to wolves at all. From Darwin to Coppinger, there have been several theories about how dogs evolved from wolves, the consensus being that the most likely hypothesis is one of self selection. Thousands of years ago, some wolves became more tolerant of humans and scavenged from village dumps while other wolves fled. The less fearful wolves became more isolated from the wild population and became more a part of a human community. Their numbers multiplied, they became a domestic ‘species' and adapted to their new human environment. “ In time, these tamed wolves would have become less and less like their wild forebears because inherently variable characters, such as coat colour, carriage of ears and tail, overall size and proportion of limbs would be altered by the combined effects of artificial and natural selection. In this way, the wolf became a dog ”.
o As Coppinger says, “ A new species evolves through the gradual shifting, over time, of gene frequency within a population .” Although our dogs retain some wolf-like behaviours such as marking, digging and walking around in circles before laying down, etc. this does not account for why we should compare our dog's behaviour with a wolf's behaviour because, quite simply, a dog is not a wolf.
o A dog's brain is smaller - which results in amongst other things
· less acute sight and hearing although both senses are still very acute in our domestic dog compared to ours
· The brain became smaller because it needs calories to grow. Wolves that didn't embrace man and remained wild had a higher calorific diet compared to those who scavenged around the village dumps eating whatever they could find.
o Also the dog remains more juvenile throughout its life. A dog will still want to play ball well into later life.
o A dog has different values to the wolf. A dog's values are what he finds rewarding within his environment. Things like food, toys, walks, companionship, playing with his owner, doing agility, retrieving, herding, and all the other things we have introduced into our dog's existence.
o A wolf's values are survival. Food, water, shelter, companionship and procreation, so dogs don't think like wolves.
o Wolves rarely bark – dogs bark all the time! In fact during evolution, we produced breeds that tend to bark more then other breeds, the Spitz breeds for example, and breeds that don't often bark like the Shiba Inu
o As you probably know dogs sweat through their paws– wolves don't have those sweat glands in their paws.
o A wolf bitch doesn't come into season until she is 2 year old. Then she has 1 season per year at the same time each year so the pups arrive in the Spring when food is more plentiful and chances of survival are greater.
o Compare that to a dog bitch that can come into season as early as 6 months of age, generally has 2 seasons a year and at any time of year depending on when she was born.
Having mentioned some of the differences between dog and wolf we cannot ignore the fact they are still genetically linked and therefore do share certain common behaviours. Experiments carried out by Scott & Fuller in the 1960s' showed similar behaviour patterns in the wolf and the dog.
Interestingly though there were 19 behaviours missing from the dog and they were mainly related to hunting and catching prey. This is emphasised by Coppinger when he mentions that a dog's brain is smaller, predatory motor patterns are different and generally a dog behaves differently to a wolf particularly when it comes to catching, killing, dissecting and eating prey.
Scott & Fuller grouped these common behaviours into 9 categories;
1. Investigatory (exploring the environment)
Bring a new puppy or dog into your home and it will natural investigate his new environment. Take him on a walk somewhere he's never been before and he'll explore it.
2. Ingestive (eating and drinking)
Both wolf and dog chew their food and drink in the same fashion with the tongue curled back
3. Eliminative (urinating and defecating)
Dogs eliminate and mark territory in the same way as a wolf
4. Care Seeking
This is mainly seen in puppies soliciting for care and attention. Whining, yelping, tail wagging, and licking for example
5. Shelter seeking (finding somewhere warm and dry)
A wolf will find shelter when he needs to and a dog will curl up in front of the fire at home.
6. Agonistic (degrees of boldness and timidity, and competitive behaviours)
We have dogs that are bold, timid and competitive. This has a lot to do with breeding and socialisation though.
7. Group (doing things together)
This is first seen in puppies at about 5 weeks of age when they start to play and follow each other. If you have more than one dog at home you may see them lie down together or play together.
8. Sexual (looking for and finding a mate)
Dogs show the same behaviour patterns of mating as captive wolves. The behaviour patterns in free packs of wolves have not been observed in detail.
9. Care giving (looking after the young)
This is the giving of care and attention to puppies and is mainly seen in bitches
So we know there are common behaviours between dog and wolf and we can actually see them.
BUT with the 19 missing behaviours between the wolf and the domestic dog AND the manipulation and selective breeding for specific behaviours that are totally alien to the wolf, the dog has now evolved into something quite different.
The Pack Rules
Back in the 1980s, and early ‘90s, we were almost brainwashed to believe that any sign of a behavioural problem meant our dog was being dominant. Any training book of the day and even some today tell us that we, as the owner, need to be the Alpha of the ‘pack' to prevent our dog becoming dominant.
In effect, to prevent the dog becoming dominant, we should copy supposed wolf behaviour, like:
· Eat something before feeding the dog. The Alpha eats first.
· Don't let the dog sleep on your bed. The Alpha never shares its bed with a subordinate.
· Don't let the dog lay at the top of the stairs. The Alpha always occupies the highest position.
· Don't let the dog lay in the hallway or in doorways. The Alpha can see the comings and goings of his ‘pack'.
· Never step over the dog. The Alpha would make the dog move.
· Never let your dog go through a doorway first. It's the Alpha's privilege to go first.
· Dogs that pull on the lead are ‘dominant'. Alpha leads the pack.
· Never let your dog initiate the beginning or end of a game. The Alpha control games.
· Never let your dog win games of tug. It's the Alpha that wins the trophy.
· A dog that don't come back when called are being dominant.
We were even advised to physically put our dog into a submissive position by putting it into an Alpha rollover; putting the dog on its side, holding it down with one hand on its chest and the other hand over its mouth. Alternatively, stand astride the dog and lift its front legs off the ground. All this to show the dog who is boss!
What About Us?
It's all well and good discussing how wolves behave and comparing it to our dog's behaviour but where do we mere humans fit in? Well, according to the ‘pack rules', we fit in there, right along side the dog! Do you not think there is something a bit strange about that? The rules are based on canine-to-canine behaviour and communication, so how can we become involved with the way they communicate? We cannot emulate what a dog does because we are not dogs. Putting a dog into an alpha rollover or lifting its front legs off the ground for example, is only going to confuse the dog. Even worse, if someone tried either of those actions it might result in a defensive-aggressive reaction from the dog. Only an extremely aggressive dog would flip another dog over and that would only be because he was in for the kill, biting at the throat or stomach. Just think what our dog would understand from our action if we put him in an alpha rollover!
Let's consider some of the rules we have been taught about how to bring up our dogs, bearing in mind that they are based on how wolves behave, and not how dogs behave.
Eat something before feeding the dog because the Alpha eats first . So there's dad with 12-week-old Fido's food ready in a bowl placed on top of the kitchen worktop. He calls mum in from the garden where she's cutting the grass (I'm all for sexual equality!); teenage daughter who is drying her hair while listening to the stereo and teenage son who is in the garage stripping down his motorbike. They all gather in the kitchen and eat a biscuit. When they've finished the biscuit, they all go back about their business while Fido eats his dinner. What has Fido really learned from that? Probably that we humans are all mad! But in taking this action, it's possible that we might cause the puppy stress, as he doesn't understand why he is not allowed his dinner. Alternatively, it might encourage jumping up in order to get to its dinner. Possibly we might be doing more harm than good.
Let's reconsider the natural wolf pack scenario. If there is plenty of food to go around then there is no ‘pecking order' and the entire pack would eat at the same time. Alternatively, if food were in short supply, contrary to the ‘pack rules', the pups would eat first. A wolf bitch has invested 50% of her genes in her puppies. Her priority is to ensure their survival and she will go without food herself if necessary. Therefore it's not so much a question of ‘dominance', more a question of resources and survival of the young and therefore, survival of the species.
Further, our behaviour is totally alien to a dog because, as I said, we are not dogs. We cannot show canine signals or display the body language and facial expressions a dog would do if it were showing signs of ‘dominance' towards another dog.
Don't let the dog go through a door before you. As canine-to-canine communication is different to canine-to-human communication, do you think the dog would understand why it's not allowed through a doorway before its owner? When it's pouring with rain and the dog has to go outside to eliminate, would you go out the back door first and get soaking wet just to enforce your Alpha position? And what happens if you have more than one dog in the household? Will you be able to go through all the doorways in the house even if the dogs are in different parts of the house?????
In its hay day, Pack Rules were seen as the answer to all behavioural problems, even to some that didn't exist! Some people followed the rules too rigidly and ended up with a fairly miserable dog. Many behaviour counsellors would, (and some still do) recommend Pack Rules to solve a behavioural problem. Before John Fisher's sad and untimely death, he started to question Pack Rules and wrote, “ if it's how you want to live with your dog I have news that is going to disappoint a lot of people who have striven to reach this Alpha status – it all means diddly squat to your dog .” This brings me back to the fact that the dog does not perceive itself as part of our ‘pack', so all the Pack Rules are meaningless in terms of canine/human communication.
Let's look at the evidence. The idea of a dog being ‘dominant' originated from how a pack of wolves behave. The research by Mech shows that a free pack of wolves does not have an Alpha ruling over the pack. His findings show dominance challenges between wolves are rare, if they exist at all; instead they act as a family, sharing labour. IF we were to apply the wolf's genetic behaviour to our dogs, then it's the genes from the free packs that we should be looking at and not the observed behaviour of a captive pack that have a more competitive lifestyle.
From the wolf evolved the dog, a different species with different values. Yet the Pack Rules we are supposed to use on our dogs' pertain to wolf behaviour. Something doesn't quite fall into place here! To add to the confusion, the Pack Rules are based on canine-to-canine communication and as packs are conspecific, dogs won't see themselves as part of our ‘pack'. Therefore if we try to enforce Pack Rules, we could end up with one very confused, depressed dog.
Coppinger's research has shown that modern day feral dogs do not have to form a pack or have a hierarchy in order to survive. If all the vital elements of survival are available, food, water, and shelter, they are happy to live independently or harmoniously in small groups. As we provide all the elements of survival and more for our dog, why would it need to raise its status? Further research done by Coppinger on the difference in a dog's motor patterns to a wolf's motor patterns, for example, explains more of why our dogs should not be compared to wolves.
Accepting that the dog has evolved from the wolf and is now a different species, we can start to treat it as a dog and not a wolf in dog's clothing. The dog is not going to be dominant and raise its status in the ‘pack' because it's not part of the human ‘pack'. Equally, we don't have to be dominant over the dog using Pack Rules, as the dog won't understand what we are trying to tell it.
A ‘dominant' owner has connotations of aversive or harsh methods to ‘teach' or ‘train' a dog in order to get their own way. It has connotations of a suppressed dog not being able to truly express its feelings. It has connotations of a lack of bonding and understanding with its owner.
We don't have to be Alpha, dominant or pack leader. All we need to be is an owner responsible for guiding our dog and influencing its behaviour through socialising and training, to live in harmony with us. We also owe it to our dog to learn about dog behaviour so we can understand better our canine companion. If we follow those ‘rules' we should have no fear of dogs taking over our family, let alone the world!
Barry Eaton
September 2004
Click here to purchase Dominance:Fact or Fiction
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The Evolution of Canine Social Behaviour Roger Abrantes (1997)
Alpha Status, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs David Mech (2000)
Dogs Ray Coppinger (2001)
Diary of a Dotty Dog Doctor John Fisher (1997)
|
|
|
|
Offering a diverse range of products
