# Dogs are not pack animals???



## Good_Karma (Jun 28, 2009)

Would love to hear some opinions on this topic.

Excerpt from "The Dish by Darcy"
To crate or not to crate? | The Dish by Darcie

Dogs are not pack animals.

Dogs, left on their own, might hook up with another dog now and then but it doesn’t last. I know it’s a popular myth made up by some people to sell certain forms of training to the mass public but it’s just not true. Dogs like the company of other beings as long as there is food to eat and learn to live with others but they don’t have to live that way to be happy and healthy if they have enough food to eat on their own. More often than not, wild dogs and those who have run away from home or have gotten lost, stay on their own. Dogs are more like us in this respect….we don’t have to constantly have another person or more than one person, or dog, around us moving in the same direction to be happy, safe or contented. That lifestyle would kill me and my dogs, I like my alone quiet time, they like their alone quiet time. All of us, including the dogs, need some alone time. If we don’t get that, if there is always someone else near us, touching us, talking to us, even breathing in the same room all the time, we become truly dependent on that. It’s not healthy. It’s one of the ways that separation anxiety starts and that is a terrible, awful thing which can be very hard to fix. There will be an emergency some day and we may have to leave our dogs for a little while, they should be calm and quiet, sleeping and restful until we return. That is peace.

Don’t believe that your dogs aren’t pack animals? Go out into some deserted place with your dogs for an extended period of time, say 30 days. Without food. How long will the dogs stay with you if you’re not feeding them? Will they hunt and feed the food to you? If you’re really the real leader of the pack, of course they would. They won’t. You’re not fast enough or strong enough to be the leader of dogs under those circumstances. Dogs don’t have pack leaders. Wolves pack, dogs don’t.

People are not dog pack leaders, no matter how much you train and insist that the dogs obey you. You will never be a “pack leader” without fail unless it’s under a controlled experiment like inside houses with doors, yards with fences, and collars with leashes. We teach our dogs that life is good with us, we bond with them the best that we can and we keep them corralled. Yes, there are dogs, I’ve had them, that would rather come with me than do anything else but we all know when we get back home, we’ll have some dinner that I put together.

If all is well and we don’t have to go out into the forest to fend for ourselves, the dogs will probably still keep coming back to the door to be let in to get petted and fed. Personally I like it that way and hope that my dogs and I never have to go out into the wild to make a living like that. I’d miss them when they take off on their own to find something to eat…leaving me behind. – Darcie


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I have heard that pariah or feral dogs do not pack in the way that wolves do.


----------



## JazzNScout (Aug 2, 2008)

Dogs are pack animals. They are very social animals. Feral dogs do often form packs. Dogs have been known, of course, to wait in one place for days on end waiting for their people to return. 

What is this woman's background?


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Some wild dogs who don't appear to pack up...

Are Dogs Pack Animals?


----------



## DogGone (Nov 28, 2009)

Good_Karma said:


> More often than not, wild dogs and those who have run away from home or have gotten lost, stay on their own.


I get the impression that the type of people that write this type of article have lost touch with reality and haven’t watched dogs and wolves in their natural state. From what I’ve seen most dogs given time, choice and the opportunity will form packs. It’s not particularly noticeable in areas where there is good animal control. However in areas that don’t have decent animal control and/or that are having economic downturn that often results in a lot of dog suddenly becoming stray; between governmental cutbacks in the sudden surge of strays can overwhelm animal control infrastructure. Since the economy is taking a dive I’m seeing more and more dog packs in suburban and urban areas. I think that’s another reason that some areas are seeing a surge of dog attacks on humans. I’ve seen some dog packs of about 20 dogs; and almost half of them were pit bulls like dogs in urban areas. I’ve heard of dog packs using the same techniques that coyotes use out West; were a pack will often send in a single dog/coyote (often in heat) out to lure in unsuspecting pet from a careless owner. The lure dog/coyote will lead the dog into the concealed pack where it will be ambushed. From what I understand this behavior in the typically mostly happens in the country when there is a drought and natural food is in short supply.

Dog attacked by pack of dogs.




 
Two people injured by dog pack.
http://www.redlasso.com/ClipPlayer.aspx?id=0c49ff29-1e76-4796-a862-72828412f05e

The last time that I was in Detroit I saw a dog pack in a depressed urban area. The last time I was in Toledo I saw several dog packs. The last time I was in Portsmouth, I saw a dog pack. When I went to the poor urban areas of Mexico it was the exception, not to see a dog pack. Given time and opportunity dogs will often form packs. Just like wolves in the wild most are social animals that form packs; some prefer to be solitary/independent. I even was watching the animal control show on animal planet that was an urban setting with the cute blonde animal control officer and she was complaining about how many wild packs were running around the city and how many of the dogs in those packs were pit bulls. If I recall correctly that was New York City.


----------



## alaman (May 3, 2006)

The author is wrong


----------



## BowWowMeow (May 7, 2007)

I used to live up in the foothills of the Sandia Mountains in New Mexico. In addition to the coyotes, there was a pack of wild dogs that lived up there. 

I don't think that wild dogs spend _all_ of their time with the pack but I do think dogs are pack animals.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

My guess is this woman has never owned a German Shepherd or a Doberman. Had both...neither let me go to the bathroom without company.

I have watched documentaries on feral dogs. If I remember correctly, they don't form a pack like a wolf pack. They will live in the same area but the dynamics are different. I'll look for the program I watched to see if it's online anywhere.


----------



## Jax08 (Feb 13, 2009)

This is interesting. Sounds like when they have fully reverted to being feral they do form a pack similar to a wolf pack.

Feral dog management and control


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

Some things on the article are true, yet it doesn't mean dogs are not pack animals. That they don't form the close family related pack wolves do is on thing, that they want to spend some time alone is another, that dogs are not pack animals is to stretch the subject a looooot...

Were I live there are stray dogs by dozens. They are not always together, like a school of fish moving on the city, but they do gather, and have sort of a rank system and friendships, specially at night.


----------



## DogGone (Nov 28, 2009)

IMAO The article was such trash that I stopped reading it. Then I wondered if maybe I was jumping to conclusions so I read more. The article is contradictory rubbish. 


Good_Karma said:


> You will never be a “pack leader” without fail unless it’s under a controlled experiment like inside houses with doors, yards with fences, and collars with leashes.


In the past four decades I’ve had 6 German Shepherds; I was pack leader to all of them. Sure most of the time the dog spent in houses, yards or on a leash; however almost every day I took them on walks in the woods without a leash. I’ve taken several vacations where I spent weeks at a time in the wilderness without having a leash; yet my dogs are so well bonded to me that it was rarely left my sight and when they did it was just for a few minutes. I’ve been a pack leader for over four decades and I’ve been pack leader the entire time. I feel it is irresponsible not to be a pack leader when you have a dog like a German Shepherd. I feel if you’re not a good pack leader your dog is more likely to lose control, be aggressive and be a danger. A stable leader usually results in a stable pack.


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

Most research points towards alpha theory being extremely outdated. Even wolf packs function far differently than what was once believed and it is now known that feral dogs form much, much looser "packs" than wolves. Things are much more fluid in wolf packs than what was once assumed and even more fluid in dog to dog interactions. 

A great example of this with my dogs is that in the house, I jokingly refer to Loki as the Queen Dog. The other dogs are intimidated by her and take extra care not to invade her space or seem like they are interested in stuff that she has. All of the dogs offer appeasement behaviors towards her and she can be very loud and intimidating if they do something she doesn't like. Old school of thought would say this is a "dominant, alpha type" female. Yet outdoors, she's just another dog and the others act fairly indifferent towards her (and she to them). That is very typical of dog social interaction, it's fluid and depends on the situation and not that there is one "alpha" who always rules all dogs in a group.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Samba said:


> Some wild dogs who don't appear to pack up...
> 
> Are Dogs Pack Animals?


 
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.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Jax08 said:


> This is interesting. Sounds like when they have fully reverted to being feral they do form a pack similar to a wolf pack.
> 
> Feral dog management and control


 
I can not see most dogs living on their own in the wild. Dogs will form a pack because they are much more successful hunters that way.


----------



## Stogey (Jun 29, 2010)

I have often seen feral dogs pack up, either it be for hunting, protection from other predatory animals or just being social. I consider a pack 3 or more animals.


----------



## Mrs.K (Jul 14, 2009)

AgileGSD said:


> Most research points towards alpha theory being extremely outdated. Even wolf packs function far differently than what was once believed and it is now known that feral dogs form much, much looser "packs" than wolves. Things are much more fluid in wolf packs than what was once assumed and even more fluid in dog to dog interactions.
> 
> *A great example of this with my dogs is that in the house, I jokingly refer to Loki as the Queen Dog. The other dogs are intimidated by her and take extra care not to invade her space or seem like they are interested in stuff that she has. All of the dogs offer appeasement behaviors towards her and she can be very loud and intimidating if they do something she doesn't like. Old school of thought would say this is a "dominant, alpha type" female. Yet outdoors, she's just another dog and the others act fairly indifferent towards her (and she to them). That is very typical of dog social interaction, it's fluid and depends on the situation and not that there is one "alpha" who always rules all dogs in a group.*


This could be my pack. 

Outside, Zenzy is actually teaming up with Indra and the walk side on side while in the house she can't stand her company and is literally the "alpha dominant bitch".
In the house she only lets Yukon get close to her, while outside all three of them get along. However I am their main source and you can barely take them away from me. 
Yesterday I wanted to wait in the car while my husband wanted to take the dogs upstairs. It was impossible for him to call them. They wouldn't follow him and I had to get out and take them inside. 

He was like "They can't survive five minutes without you."

It's true, they would be okay if each of them was a single dog, but Yukon is doing much much better with having another dog around him. 

They need their own space, they need a place where they can withdrew themselves from the pack just like us humans. Sometimes we want to be alone but honestly, to say that they are not pack animals is flat out rubbish and wrong.

Dogs are always stronger in a pack. Thats a no-brainer.


----------



## arycrest (Feb 28, 2006)

There used to be a large pack of wild/feral dogs in the Bowie, MD area - it took a long time to eradicate it. I recall one time I was at a local park eating my lunch when some of the pack members approached me - it really scared me since they weren't too affraid of humans. I tossed them my sandwich and ran like heck to my car.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

I find this kind of articles plain harmful. after decades of believing in the whole "alpha-dominance" theory, the slowly change to a new mindset is hard, sometimes it is hard even for me. I am still doing my own research based on several articles and I'm on the way to form my own opinion on the subject of the whole social dog behavior, not yet there... But when someone who has not investigated as much, has read only a couple of things on the web and finds something like what this lady wrote, the first gut feeling is "Bulls***" and that person will keep stuck longer with the memes of the dominance theories.


----------



## Lauri & The Gang (Jun 28, 2001)

Most dogs left to go feral will eventually team up with other dogs. For breeding, for more successful hunting, for protection from other predators and some will do it just for the social aspect. A few will remain loners.

Humans can NEVER be true 'pack leaders' - not like a dog or wolf can.

Dogs can communicate SO much - with the flick of a tail or a tilt of their head, with their fur/hair, with their eyes - that humans will NEVER be able to imitate.

Humans can bond with their dogs and be in charge of their dogs. That's the best we can hope for.


----------



## Good_Karma (Jun 28, 2009)

Catu said:


> I find this kind of articles plain harmful. after decades of believing in the whole "alpha-dominance" theory, the slowly change to a new mindset is hard, sometimes it is hard even for me. I am still doing my own research based on several articles and I'm on the way to form my own opinion on the subject of the whole social dog behavior, not yet there... But when someone who has not investigated as much, has read only a couple of things on the web and finds something like what this lady wrote, the first gut feeling is "Bulls***" and that person will keep stuck longer with the memes of the dominance theories.


I posted this article to encourage debate, and so that we may all continue to question what we are being told by "authorities" on the subject. I neither endorse, nor reject Darcie's theory. I say theory, because in fact all currently held beliefs on dog behavior are nothing more than theories. I do not think it is possible to know for certain either way because none of us are dogs and have not lived as a dog lives.

The beauty of questioning your own theories is that under scrutiny, you will either find that they do not hold up, OR you may find yourself further convinced of your being correct. Either way is a positive outcome.

It brings me joy to see how passionately you all feel on the subject of dog behavior. Regardless of how any of you feel, I want to thank you for participating in this discussion, and I hope that we can all leave this conversation as more enlightened individuals.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

Oh, don't worry, It is clear that that was your intention in the first place


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

Does any one consider cats to be pack animals? If so, how should cat owners show that they are the "pack leader" or "alpha"?


----------



## Good_Karma (Jun 28, 2009)

I can say with certainty that MY cats are not pack animals. They seem to tolerate my existence, and if it weren't for the food and water (plus the fact they don't have opposable thumbs to turn doorknobs) they would be outta here.

I read a book once about what would happen to the earth if humans dropped out of existence. When the author spoke about what would happen to the pets, he said that cats' lives would remain relatively unchanged as they are not so dissimilar in behavior from non-domesticated cats. They also do not have to rely on humans for anything and could manage just fine without us.

I believe the scientific community is of the opinion that cats are solitary creatures. Plus Rudyard Kipling said so, so it must be true.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Yes, it is always good to question the conventional wisdom, I think. 

I think a lot of training can go on without any thought of pack leader. I never consider it when working with mine. I am not sure why this pack concept is seen as so integral to well trained and behaved dogs. 

I also am not sure that getting together for some cooperative endeavor as feral dogs will do really constitutes a social pack society and hierarchy.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

All cats, with the exception of lions, are solitary animals except for mating and cubs with their mother. (At least according the the Animal Planet.


----------



## IllinoisNative (Feb 2, 2010)

Jax08 said:


> My guess is this woman has never owned a German Shepherd or a Doberman. Had both...neither let me go to the bathroom without company.


Amen. If I left my dog (who is a GSD/Rottie mix) outside, know what he does? He whines at the door to get to me. He will not leave. He does not run away outside, I can have off leash anywhere, I can't pee by myself. And, yet, he doesn't have seperation anxiety. He whines a little when I leave but he settles...nothing destroyed...no panic. But he has no desire to leave me. So seperation anxiety isn't the reason he stays with me. On that point, the author is wrong.

I have no doubt that if we were strandard in the desert, he would not leave me. Ever.

Now, I have a chow mix who would leave me...LMAO. I swear he's part cat...which most chows are accused of being. He's perfectly content to live alone with minimal contact if I let him. He doesn't care to be pet, he doesn't run up to me when I come home...In fact, if it wasn't for the food that I provide him, I don't think he'd have much use for me at all. On that point, the author is correct. Not all dogs are pack animals. Although, he's IN LOVE with my other dog. I'm not sure he'd leave him...Heh.

I wonder if it comes down to breed.


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

codmaster said:


> All cats, with the exception of lions, are solitary animals except for mating and cubs with their mother. (At least according the the Animal Planet.


 But feral cats most certainly form groups. It could be that forming groups isn't sure evidence of pack animals.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

My dogs that are the most human oriented ( what some would call high in pack drive) are also the ones least interested in any canine "pack" around.


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

dog packs, pack leader/alpha (human).
i've seen packs of dogs in Mexico.
i have a dog. he listens to me and i listen to him.


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

your questions are funny. i've had cats but i never
felt like i owned them.



AgileGSD said:


> Does any one consider cats to be pack animals? If so, how should cat owners show that they are the "pack leader" or "alpha"?


----------



## DogGone (Nov 28, 2009)

AgileGSD said:


> Most research points towards alpha theory being extremely outdated.


At one time allegedly most research indicated that Caucasians were the superior race. My point is often prejudice drives and influences research. It’s much like with the Kinsey studies that raped children in the name of science to advance a political agenda. All of the alleged research that bashes alpha theory and alpha rolling seems to be people motivated by greed that are trying to sell something like training and or people there are motivated by a political agenda/power. 
　
Most of the research and all of the facts I have seen indicate that Alpha theory is on the mark. As far as packs not being fluid. I don’t know where you got that from. All the literature I have seen and all the facts I have seen over the past four decades indicate that packs are dynamic. You must have been reading garbage that I don’t bother with. Life in itself is dynamic by nature. Life is change. In wolf packs there is a hierarchy that changes. However there often is a pattern. Wolves often have duties and shifts and jobs. It’s very interesting to study their hunting behavior. Often when they are hunting large game; groups or individuals will go out and test and wear down and analyze the herds of caribou. They are often quite picky about which one they take. They like an easy kill but they also want a good meal. Once they pick their mark they wear down the individual(s) that they want. Often some wolves will wait in ambush as other wolves chase down the herd of caribou and drive them right into the ambush. (I see dogs at the dog park mimic the same behavior.)
　
They even found a skull of a Dire Wolf that obtained an injury that would’ve blinded the Wolf, however the bone managed to fuse back together. That suggests that even though the Wolf was blinded the pack continued to provide food to the disabled Wolf for quite some time.


codmaster said:


> 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.


(I accidentally posted this and other stuff in another thread that was a related topic)
I think that unethical trainers are trying to create the myth that being an alpha leader is somehow inherently cruel and ineffective; just so they can drum up more business.
　

It reminds me of a trip that I took to Canada. We checked in a hotel and my father stopped to get a drink at the hotel bar, a drunken Indian was trying to tell my dad that people could not go out in the wilderness without a guide because wolves are inherently aggressive and dangerous and you would inevitably be eaten alive. The drunken Indian was trying to tell us that wolves frequently for no reason attack humans. The drunken Indian was a liar and an idiot that was just trying to scam us into taking him on as a guide. My family have been in the deep wilderness without a guide dozens of times and we have even tracked wolves in bear country; so we know what the reality is. Only once did we hire and Indian guide for a day. Once we hired an honest knowledgeable Indian; and he showed us his cabin and all his hunting gear and how he processed and preserved/stored the spoils of his hunting, fishing and foraging.


AgileGSD said:


> Does any one consider cats to be pack animals?


Not normally. However I have noticed sometimes house kittens raised with dogs will learn some of the pack behavior. I had a kitten that would follow me and the dog around the park. I have a neighbor that also has a kitten that will follow him and his dog around the park.


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I have always had cats that would go on walks. I had one as a child that met the bus every day. More faithful than the dog!

When the kids were little, our current cat would run to get me if the baby started crying. She stands on her hind legs when she greets that kid even now. 

The youngest kiddo is 21, so she is one old kitty now. Higher pack drive than some dogs, I guess.

Lots of the information I have been seeing lately points to how unlike wolves dogs are.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

My cats must be the exception.

I have two males who are 6 months apart in age and not related. They were introduced to each other when one was a year and a half, and the other a year old. They ADORE each other. They "hunt" together, they curl up together, they groom each other.

Of course, they also come when called and sit for treats... XD


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

DogGone said:


> Most of the research and all of the facts I have seen indicate that Alpha theory is on the mark. [/QUOTE]
> 
> Prove it
> 
> ...


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

*
*

*
*

"The term “dominance” is widely used in the academic and popular literature on the behavior of domestic dogs, especially in the context of aggression. Although dominance is correctly a property of relationships, it has been erroneously used to describe a supposed trait of individual dogs, even though there is little evidence that such a trait exists. When used correctly to describe a relationship between 2 individuals, it tends to be misapplied as a motivation for social interactions, rather than simply a quality of that relationship. Hence, it is commonly suggested that a desire ‘to be dominant’ actually drives behavior, especially aggression, in the domestic dog. By contrast, many recent studies of wolf packs have questioned whether there is any direct correspondence between dominance within a relationship and agonistic behavior, and in contrast to wolves, hierarchical social structures have little relationship with reproductive behavior in feral dog packs. Nor do the exchanges of aggressive and submissive behavior in feral dogs, originally published by S. K. Pal and coworkers, fit the pattern predicted from wolf behavior, especially the submissive behavior observed between members of different packs. In the present study of a freely interacting group of neutered male domestic dogs, pairwise relationships were evident, but no overall hierarchy could be detected. Since there seems to be little empirical basis for wolf-type dominance hierarchies in dogs, the authors have examined alternative constructs. Parker's Resource Holding Potential (RHP) appears to be less useful when applied to domestic dogs than to other species, although it has the advantage of incorporating the concept of subjective resource value (V) as a factor influencing whether or not conflicts are escalated. The authors propose that associative learning, combined with V, can provide more parsimonious explanations for agonistic behavior in dogs than can the traditional concept of dominance."
Elsevier


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

Yes, the theories and research they are a changing regarding dominance. They are also changing regarding the once accepted likeness of dogs to wolves in behavior and social arrangements.

Dogs are into us, but it may not be because we are pack leader so to speak.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

(Warning, coment coming from someone who doesn't own cats)

Cats may not be pack animals by themselves, but thy are a domestic animals with all the changes it involves, starting with neurological and endocrinology changes from the African cat they come from. That means that just like dogs, cats have a degree of neoteny (keeping juvenile characteristics in adulthood) and that makes them more tolerant of other cats than any wild counterpart. On the other hand, the range of territory is widely determined by the amount of food available, if there is food in abundance, there is no need to guard so jealously a vast territory and coexistence is possible. Since they are eternal juveniles and food is less of a problem for feral domestic cats, with all our trash and rats, they can form alliances just like juvenile lions, leopards and cheetahs do.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

AgileGSD said:


> Does any one consider cats to be pack animals? If so, how should cat owners show that they are the "pack leader" or "alpha"?


 
Nah, Dogs have owners, cats have staff.


----------



## Good_Karma (Jun 28, 2009)

AgileGSD, I think I'm in love with you! Actual references to follow up on rather than bold, unsubstantiated statements.


Marry me?


----------



## Samba (Apr 23, 2001)

I often see wolves referenced when there is talk of all the pack and dominance in dogs. Traditional concepts of wolf pack dynamic have their challengers now.

NPWRC :: Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

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 (Aug 7, 2008)

codmaster said:


> 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 (Aug 5, 2009)

Chicagocanine said:


> 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 (Aug 5, 2009)

Chicagocanine said:


> 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?*
> 
> ...


 
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 (Jan 17, 2006)

codmaster said:


> 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?




codmaster said:


> 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 (Aug 5, 2009)

AgileGSD said:


> Because dogs are wolves?
> 
> * Thank you - I didn't know that they were. Just very closely related.*
> 
> ...


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 (Aug 5, 2009)

AgileGSD said:


> ....
> 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 (Nov 28, 2009)

AgileGSD said:


> 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 (Aug 21, 2010)

DogGone said:


> 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 (Aug 7, 2008)

codmaster said:


> 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.




codmaster said:


> 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.




DogGone said:


> 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.




codmaster said:


> 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.


----------



## AgileGSD (Jan 17, 2006)

codmaster said:


> 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!


 You can base your ideas on what ever you choose to but it doesn't mean they will be supported by facts. I was simply suggesting if you want to have factual and knowledge on wolf behavior, a lot of that was posted on this thread. If not, you are free to continue basing your ideas about dog behavior on extremely outdated ideas about wolf behavior.


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

AgileGSD said:


> You can base your ideas on what ever you choose to but it doesn't mean they will be supported by facts. I was simply suggesting if you want to have *factual and knowledge *on wolf behavior, a lot of that was posted on this thread. If not, you are free to continue basing your ideas about dog behavior on extremely outdated ideas about wolf behavior.


Why, thank you! You have no idea how much your opinion means to me!

And to be fair, I will also let you base your ideas on whatever "new" research that you would like to listen to today!


----------



## doggiedad (Dec 2, 2007)

i didn't understand this but i agree.:crazy:



AgileGSD said:


> "The term “dominance” is widely used in the academic and popular literature on the behavior of domestic dogs, especially in the context of aggression. Although dominance is correctly a property of relationships, it has been erroneously used to describe a supposed trait of individual dogs, even though there is little evidence that such a trait exists. When used correctly to describe a relationship between 2 individuals, it tends to be misapplied as a motivation for social interactions, rather than simply a quality of that relationship. Hence, it is commonly suggested that a desire ‘to be dominant’ actually drives behavior, especially aggression, in the domestic dog. By contrast, many recent studies of wolf packs have questioned whether there is any direct correspondence between dominance within a relationship and agonistic behavior, and in contrast to wolves, hierarchical social structures have little relationship with reproductive behavior in feral dog packs. Nor do the exchanges of aggressive and submissive behavior in feral dogs, originally published by S. K. Pal and coworkers, fit the pattern predicted from wolf behavior, especially the submissive behavior observed between members of different packs. In the present study of a freely interacting group of neutered male domestic dogs, pairwise relationships were evident, but no overall hierarchy could be detected. Since there seems to be little empirical basis for wolf-type dominance hierarchies in dogs, the authors have examined alternative constructs. Parker's Resource Holding Potential (RHP) appears to be less useful when applied to domestic dogs than to other species, although it has the advantage of incorporating the concept of subjective resource value (V) as a factor influencing whether or not conflicts are escalated. The authors propose that associative learning, combined with V, can provide more parsimonious explanations for agonistic behavior in dogs than can the traditional concept of dominance."
> Elsevier


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

DogGone said:


> All of the alleged research that bashes alpha theory and alpha rolling seems to be people motivated by greed that are trying to sell something like training and or people there are motivated by a political agenda/power.




Based on the frequency with which you make this statement it would seem that YOU are the one who's _" ... motivated by greed ... trying to sell something like training and or people [who] are motivated by a political agenda/power. "_ 

I bash the Alpha Roll because it's dangerous *even when done correctly * and it's a poor imitation of what it purports to be. Dogs in the wild don't roll one another except in play. Rather the submissive dog rolls himself. This is NOT what is done in an Alpha Roll. 




DogGone said:


> Most of the research and all of the facts I have seen indicate that Alpha theory is on the mark.


 
It's close. This work was done on packs of wild wolves that had been captured and put together. They were not, as is a wild pack a group of (mostly) blood related animals. Rather they were a group of strangers thrown together. Domestic canids sometimes form packs but they resemble neither the naturally occurring wild wolf packs nor the artificially formed packs put together for study. In the wolf packs only the alpha male and alpha female will breed. In domestic packs any male will breed with any female. In the wolf pack the alpha wolves will feed at a kill first and the other animals will wait until they are done before moving in. Violating this unwritten rule, usually results in a display of dominance and if that doesn’t work then mock combat (which is just another display) and if that fails, true combat, where injuries can and do occur. In the wild there is ONE alpha male and ONE alpha female. In packs of domestic dogs the alpha role often switches depending on the activity that the pack is involved in. 




DogGone said:


> As far as packs not being fluid. I don’t know where you got that from. All the literature I have seen and all the facts I have seen over the past four decades indicate that packs are dynamic. You must have been reading garbage that I don’t bother with.


 
Please show us this _"literature"_ and the sources for _"the facts."_ Dismissing the opinions of others as _"garbage"_ is just rude!


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

DogGone said:


> 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.


 
Please direct us to this video with a link. This will be the third time that I've asked you to show us such video. 




DogGone said:


> Alpha rolling if done properly is not going to make a dog *aggressive * [Emphasis Added]


 
True, but it might make a dog *defensive. * EVEN if _"done properly."_ Bites often happen because the dog feels threatened, whether he really is or not. 




DogGone said:


> on the contrary is likely to reduce the odds of aggression and mental instability.


 
I disagree. Please show us something that supports this beyond your opinion masquerading as fact. 




DogGone said:


> 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.


 
True but there are better ways of establishing dominance than the Alpha Roll. 




DogGone said:


> 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.


 
How do you know that these dogs _"were spoiled?"_ How do you know that they did not _"have good rules and boundaries?"_ I'd bet that, in reality, you have no idea of how these dogs were treated at home; more than likely, you're just guessing. 




DogGone said:


> 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.


 
I regularly work with dogs like this and have owned several of them. Never have I felt the need to Alpha Roll any of them. 




DogGone said:


> The other GSD was excessively dominant with other dogs but showed no desire to dominate humans. The dog had lived on the streets ...





DogGone said:


> 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.




Are you saying that YOU Alpha Rolled the dog to get him to submit to other dogs? If so, how did this transfer from you rolling him to the other dog. Or are you telling us that this other dog had to roll him to prevent the attack?




DogGone said:


> 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.


 
Same question. Are you telling us that YOU Alpha Rolled this dog and as a result she submitted to others? If so I think it really shows just how little you understand the Alpha Roll. A dog that rolled will show submission to the person that rolled her but NOT to others, in this example (and the last one involving the dog that was mean to other dogs) *it's just used as a punishment, it has nothing to do with dominance! * The dog did something you didn't like and so you used a punishment, _rough handling and pinning the dog to the ground_to get the dog not to repeat the behavior. 




DogGone said:


> Alpha rolling was a very small part of their rehabilitation, but I think it was a very key component to start the ball rolling.


 
I'd bet that it retarded their progress, rather than helped it. 




DogGone said:


> 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. [Emphasis Added]


 

Nonsense! Alpha Rolling a dog is an extremely violent movement. It's NOTHING like _"giving a toddler a timeout!"_ I've seen many handlers bitten while doing this and many prolonged episodes of combat when it went wrong.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

Earlier Doggone wrote,


> 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.


 




Whiteshepherds said:


> 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.


 

I don't think so. There's nothing gentle about an Alpha Roll. The dog is grabbed by the loose hair around his neck with enough force so that it tries to get away you can hold on. Then he's wrestled to the ground with this grip. If he resists it can turn into a prolonged struggle. If he resists your face is within inches of his mouth. If he panics he can easily inflict a serious, disfiguring bite on your face or your arms. 

Anyone who claims this is _"gentle"_ either is doing something else or has never seen an Alpha Roll done properly. This is not "coaxing" the dog to lie down with gentle pressure. It's FORCING him down.


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

Earlier Doggone wrote, 


> ... 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.


 




Chicagocanine said:


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


 
Doggone I think that's the FOURTH person to ask you to supply videos of this. Ever going to do so?


----------



## Good_Karma (Jun 28, 2009)

LouCastle, what do you think of the original article (disregarding the alpha roll tangent)?


----------



## LouCastle (Sep 25, 2006)

I like what she says about crates. I used to have a dog that slept in his crate of his own choice. He didn't like my other dogs (when I first got him he'd have happily killed them) and at times he'd pull the door shut with his paw to "get away" from them. 

As to the pack discussion I disagree with her on many levels. While we may not be a pack by the definition of dogs sticking together under any circumstances; by the mere fact that we take dogs into our homes we form a pack. It may be artificial but still, it's a pack. Many pack dynamics need to be considered in our relationships with the dogs. 

I also know that she's wrong about dogs sticking with us only because of food. Dogs are the only species that prefer us to their own species and that has nothing to do with food. Of course this is a very general statement and many people know of exceptions. 

Her statement, _"Wolves pack, dogs don’t."_ is belied by the studies showing that domesticated dogs DO pack.


----------



## Good_Karma (Jun 28, 2009)

I kinda suspect that if I ever got into a situation like she described (say I fell and broke a leg in the woods), I'm pretty sure both my dogs would leave me. I'd like to think they wouldn't, of course, or that they'd go into town and get me a cheeseburger when I got hungry, but I just don't see them having that "stick with me til the end" dedication. I was wondering if the dog owners that DO think their dogs would never leave them are just being overly optimistic.

But then of course, just because a dog would leave his owner to ensure his own survival does not preclude the possibility of dogs as pack animals. I thought that was an odd way to make her argument.


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

I believe my dog would.


----------



## trish07 (Mar 5, 2010)

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 (Jun 28, 2009)

*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


----------



## DogGone (Nov 28, 2009)

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

_



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


----------



## kearanentalo (Nov 2, 2009)

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 (Jan 17, 2006)

kearanentalo said:


> 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 (Jun 28, 2009)

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 (Sep 20, 2010)

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 (May 14, 2012)

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 (Aug 5, 2009)

adriaticum said:


> 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"?
> ...


----------



## codmaster (Aug 5, 2009)

Wonder what an alien anthropologist studying human behavior would say about people being "pack" animals or not?


Wonder if they could talk about "human pack drive" like we do about dogs as if they were all going to behave uniformly??


Anybody want to talk about the "Dominance" theory in humans? Is it true?


Almost as complicated and multifaceted as that of dogs!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

heh! heh!


----------



## cliffson1 (Sep 2, 2006)

Dogs still have pack behavoirs and traits, but it varies with different breeds and individuals, and environment. Much of it is dormant. Living on the rural Eastern Shore of Md. in early sixties, I can remember a dog pack of 8 to 10 dogs that ran wild for well over two years unto we moved. The pack had a hiarchy(sp), with a dominant male( that after one year was supplanted by a bigger more dominant male in this bad fight), and a dominant female, with a second female that was our favorite, who only answered to the top female and the top male. The top male sired litters out of all the females, but lost his fight and place after one year and was driven from the pack. In those days there were plenty of turkeys and rabbits and other small game for the dogs to live on. Times and environments are different today, but don't think the instinct is not still there.


----------



## Wolfgeist (Dec 4, 2010)

DOGS ARE PACK ANIMALS.

They are extremely social. 

I've been to my family's place of birth, The Azores, many times. The stray dogs there have formed packs. Don't forget that wolves also leave their packs and wander on their own in search of a mate with which to start their own pack.






http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/data/2002/01/01/html/ft_20020101.1.html


----------



## Clyde (Feb 13, 2011)

Any animal that congregates in a group would be considered a pack animal. Pack is just a term used to describe a group of animals. It doesn't matter whether grouping up is the norm or only happens occasionally if a group forms then that is clear evidence the animals are pack animals. It doesn't matter if the groupings are fluid and rare they are still happening.

The type and size of groups that form will depend on environmental factors. For example many species who are normally monogomous but if the population density gets high enough will start to form polygamous groupings. Not a dog example but just an example about how social structure can change and is not set in stone.

Humans are "pack" animals we congregate in groups. A group of animals that live in a house together and have social interactions are a "pack". Same with a group of people who often meet for social outings together. When you meet up like that you are forming a pack.

Also the term pack does not imply anything about what the social structure of that group of animals is.

I think people get to caught on the term pack and make it out to mean something very specific which it doesn't. A school of fish, a flock of geese, a pack of dogs, a congregation of people. It is just a grouping. 

I do think that any time mammals group up social hierarchies will develop. Human groupings are very fluid and constantly changing. Social hierarchies that develop are also very fluid and changing depending on the group that forms and the task at hand. Say in a group of people who work together there my be one person who really controls group projects and acts like the leader. But if that same group goes out for a night out someone else might step up and control the main actions and movements of the group.


----------



## Marnie (Oct 11, 2011)

Catu said:


> (Warning, coment coming from someone who doesn't own cats)
> 
> Cats may not be pack animals by themselves, but thy are a domestic animals with all the changes it involves, starting with neurological and endocrinology changes from the African cat they come from. That means that just like dogs, cats have a degree of neoteny (keeping juvenile characteristics in adulthood) and that makes them more tolerant of other cats than any wild counterpart. On the other hand, the range of territory is widely determined by the amount of food available, if there is food in abundance, there is no need to guard so jealously a vast territory and coexistence is possible. Since they are eternal juveniles and food is less of a problem for feral domestic cats, with all our trash and rats, they can form alliances just like juvenile lions, leopards and cheetahs do.


I read the studies some years ago that showed pet cats do remain in a perpetual immature status. Very interesting how they have become successful by adapting to certain people pleasing behaviors. 

Growing up in rural Illinois, I remember dog packs. Most of the dogs were pets but some were probably feral. Farmers hated these packs and kept shotguns loaded with rock salt by the door to discourage the sport killing of their farm animals. Several dogs together were easily able to bring down a calf or lamb and destroy a whole flock of chickens. Unlike coyotes or wolves, they had no fear of people so they often chased kids on bicycles. They occasionally mauled a child which is something they probably never would have done alone. These packs were fluid, picking up dogs as they roamed thru new territory and loosing dogs that wondered off to return home.

As far as this author goes, you have to say something new to get published. You can't keep rehashing previous ideas and opinions. Always interesting to hear new theories but sometimes you know from long years of experience that there isn't even a grain of truth.


----------

