# Agression problem between two brothers



## shadow79 (Dec 4, 2012)

Hey guys, I have 2 pups from the same liter, both males, Shadow (70 lbs) and Guiness (74 lbs) and they're 6 and a half months old. The problems seem to be when someone is laying on the floor with one of them and the other walks past the one who is laying with the person will give a growl and within seconds its a full blown fight between the 2 of them. At first Guiness was the only one doing this but within the past 2-3 weeks Shadow has begun to do this also. When they do this we put them down until they are submissive but it doesnt seem to stop it from happening again. If a friend comes in the house also and is petting 1 over the other they have fought due to that as well. Also Guiness is very food aggressive towards "unclaimed" food. The 2 dogs eat nose to nose with their bowls right next to each other with no problems. They don't try to eat the others food and there is zero aggression. However if there is food left out EX. food shopping and a bag is left on the floor with the scent of food Guiness will protect that item and attack the other dogs as they walk by. (I also have a 12 year old pit mix 60 lbs. also a male) We know what triggers their fights and try to stop it before it gets to a full blown fight but sometimes you're not always able to stop it in time. Any training tricks/suggestions?


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

first of all welcome to the list .
all right then, enough of that , down to business.
getting two dogs , especially the same gender, from one litter , is a recipe for problems , and a recipe for a less than satisfactory human to dog bond and relationship.
two GSD that are competitive and not compatible , initiating fights and a senior pit mix -- sounds to be like an open canister of fuel and the lit match falling through the air about to connect and then - bam .

young dogs need discipline , which is not putting them down till they submit. You see that does not work. The issue with being competitive with each other is not about you . That dynamic is between the two dogs .
You are lying down with the dog and then acting like a dog and I would watch that they don't put you in the middle.
and I would watch out that the pit doesn't get suckered in and you have a three or four way bloody fight that you can't control physically and can't control at all because it is in a heated emotional state with dogs in a different unreachable zone determined to win.

solution - choose one of the male pups and find a great home for the other

enroll in some obedience class . Become the leader . Discipline is what gives security and harmony which any group living being , humans, dogs, horses thrive in . Discipline is not bootstrap follow orders. It is a guide to what is expected , what is rewarding , what will be redirected.

at the moment it sounds like you have a pack of dogs living in a house and you are a member, it is their house , while it should be you have a home that you share with your dogs .

so the discussion begins


----------



## Kyleigh (Oct 16, 2012)

I fully support what Carm is saying. You're new here, so you don't have any knowledge of some of the members. 

Carm is very experienced in dog ownership, from puppies to old dogs, and knows what she is talking about! 

The ONLY thing I would say if you don't want to give one up ... quit your day job so you can be around to train both of them INDIVIDUALLY and then together. Because keeping these two together HAPPILY is going to be a full time job in and of itself.

I really can't add anything else.


----------



## sashadog (Sep 2, 2011)

I would have to second Carmspack and add in that this isn't a simple training issue. You have two males, the same age that are now competing with each other over resources. This isn't something that a basic obedience class will fix overnight... I would suggest keeping them separated unless they are leashed with separate people handling them. Also, are they neutered?


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

I would never sell two pups from one litter to a person . I tell them see me later, in a year or two. Better for the person, better for the dog.


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

The problems with owning littermates, especially same-sex littermates, are so common that it has a name: Littermate Syndrome. You are just now beginning to understand why it's a bad idea to take 2 pups from the same litter, or any 2 same-sex dogs close in age.

Honestly, I hate to tell you this, but it's going to get worse. Much worse.

I second everything Carmen says, including her recommendation to re-home one of the pups. I know it sounds harsh, but believe me... life will be SO much easier and better for everyone--you, the dogs, and your family.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

Rehome one of the pups. Keep the one that your old gets along best with.


----------



## Castlemaid (Jun 29, 2006)

Agree with Carmen - hard to hear this i know. People get two pups the same age thinking that they will be bonded and have a playmate to meet their needs, but that is human think - in dog think, it can go two ways, and neither is of benefit to the dog:

Either they do bond so closely that the humans are in the background and have no meaning/authority/relationship with the dogs, 

or, more commonely,

The other dog is seen as competition for resources and status and must be eliminated. 

Very bad situation to be in. 

The two littermate issues are so common that we have a section linking articles discussing the pitfalls and extra effort needed to raise littermates:

http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...67994-should-i-get-two-puppies-dogs-once.html


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

I have two brothers, born here. They absolutely hate each other. 

For me, I think it is unfair to "make" one dog be subordinate to the other, so Anik is my husband's and Ari is mine, one has the den and the other one the living room, one the front yard and the other the back.
It is a ton of work.


----------



## kiya (May 3, 2010)

Growing up, my grandparents had to brothers, Bucky & Lightning. I remember them being together when I was really young then they started fighting and my grandmother separated them. After that they couldn't be near each other.
While they are still young it would be best to rehome one of them.


----------



## shadow79 (Dec 4, 2012)

in about a year or so one will be moving out with me, the other will be staying in my parents house. i bought a house but now were doing all the renovations and until it is livable they both will be living with us in 1 house. Shadow is my dog and Guiness is my dads. The pit mix isnt a problem at all, hes a VERY mellow dog and they both dont bother him, he doesnt get involved in the fights either. were trying to figure something out for the time being and giving one away is not an answer due to the fact they will be seperated within a year.


----------



## kiya (May 3, 2010)

Keeping them separated is the safest solution, you never know when somebody will get a bug up their butt and start a fight. I'd avoid the vet bill or worse. Good luck.


----------



## Mooch (May 23, 2012)

Perhaps look at neutering them - their hormones will be kicking in right about now too which will make things even "tenser" between the 2 boys


----------



## Marc (Oct 25, 2012)

this maybe completely wrong, and I am not offering advice, just a suggestion.... maybe even a question for more experienced handlers but....

I know this may sound a bit draconian, but, dogs are pack animals, that survive in a hierarchy, thinking of wolves now, wolves will have a strict hierarchy, with the alpha male dictating the roles of the other dogs. Would it not make sense to create a situation, where one of the dogs is submissive to the other, for example, making one of the dogs regularly winning each confrontation, and in turn they are both submissive to you? in the wild, the dogs would settle thier differences quickly and the submissive one would learn his place, is this also not possible in the home? I know this sounds outdated and possibly even a little cruel on one of the dogs, but I think if it works, is it not better than rehoming one of the dogs?

dogs that grow up with their sire, tend to have a good relationship, because in my view, the puppy learns fast that "Daddy" is the boss, and does not try to challenge him, on the rare occasion a challenge does occur, then a rehoming may be in order, OR the sire may submit to the younger dog.

Im not a behaviourist, nor do I advocate anything in this post, but it makes sense to me, would love to hear some proffesional thoughts on this idea.


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

Marc said:


> this maybe completely wrong, and I am not offering advice, just a suggestion.... maybe even a question for more experienced handlers but....
> 
> I know this may sound a bit draconian, but, dogs are pack animals, that survive in a hierarchy, thinking of wolves now, wolves will have a strict hierarchy, with the alpha male dictating the roles of the other dogs. Would it not make sense to create a situation, where one of the dogs is submissive to the other, for example, making one of the dogs regularly winning each confrontation, and in turn they are both submissive to you? in the wild, the dogs would settle thier differences quickly and the submissive one would learn his place, is this also not possible in the home? I know this sounds outdated and possibly even a little cruel on one of the dogs, but I think if it works, is it not better than rehoming one of the dogs?
> 
> ...


To be "natural" one of the males would be killed or driven away in all likely hood.


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

in about a year or so one will be moving out with me, the other will be staying in my parents house
the fact they will be seperated within a year. 

This is what you said , so please listen . Getting two was a bad idea . The breeder , I feel, took the easy way - yeah ! less effort to find homes . Neither party , yourself or your parents were truly ready to bring in two pups. 
These pups are in a very demanding high hands-on stage in their development . They need to be raised by you , not by each other . NEITHER one will become the dog that he could have been . You can't put behavioural growth on hold , warehouse it till you are ready . The behaviour and interaction is dynamic and will make lasting impressions , change the dogs . I would say let the one you are taking go to a new home because you won't be ready for a year . House renovations done on time. HAHAHA - we did 5 houses - I don't recall things ever going smoothly , on time - always something .Your time and efforts are directed to the house . I cannot imagine any free time to train and bond with a young dog that needs these things - now - .
The other thing is the pitbull is a senior who deserves some peace and quiet. Although he may be a mellow dog , dynamics are still pack - when your two males get in to it , it is exciting -- just like a school yard duke-out when all of a sudden kids come "out of the woodwork" to look on , take a jab themselves, and egg them on. Pit may just be a spectator but the two gnashing young dogs , in their irritation , may lash out on him (unintentionally through excitement when brains are left behind) .

That would be a better situation. Enjoy the dog that will be staying behind. When you are settled in to your house , which may be two years away -- then - find yourself your personal dog. 
just saying


----------



## arby665 (Nov 21, 2012)

I sure wish I would have known about this Littermate Syndrome a long time ago! When I first moved out on my own I got 2 Akitas. They were both male and littermates. I can't even begin to describe the nightmare that turned into. We were never able to get them trained to do anything and they acted like they were completely nuts. After about 2 years my oldest daughter came along and the dogs ended up with an Akita rescue. That whole experience really turned me off on the breed. Now I know it probably wasn't so much the breed as it was the circumstance.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

I really really don't understand everyones freakout over two dogs from the same littler. I sucessfully raised two males. They lived peacefully for 9 years until my Shadow passed away from DM and yes I know I was lucky but I've had friends and family that have been just as successful. 

I don't know if this will help you at all but I made sure my two never ate near each other, they had bowls of food in different rooms. One was neutered young the other got to wait until he was older. I don't know if by doing this we unintentionally did what Marc was talking about, but it never seemed like one was dominate over the other. Both were given a lot of exercise and attention and maybe they were just too tired to fight. We also had a little female Aussie who was very dominate and seemed to keep both boys in line.

All the dogs did a lot of 4-H obedience training with the kids. I also ran a Girl Scout troop, we did a bunch of camping and other stuff and there were always kids in and out paying lots attention to all of the dogs. 

Anyway many will be glad to tell you how wrong I am, how lucky I was.. but I just wanted to share a success story with you. 

Good luck. I hope it all works out!


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

It will for sure be a nightmare if they are similar in energy and rank, which is hard to determine when they are these cute little fur balls in the litter. You may have a better chance if both pups are at the opposite end of the hierarchy spectrum; so one assertive and the other one soft.
Was this your combination Shepherdmom?


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

wolfy dog said:


> It will for sure be a nightmare if they are similar in energy and rank, which is hard to determine when they are these cute little fur balls in the litter. You may have a better chance if both pups are at the opposite end of the hierarchy spectrum; so one assertive and the other one soft.
> Was this your combination Shepherdmom?


Neither one was really assertive. They were both really laid back good with people and other dogs..happy to let the little Aussie female we had rule the roost. The one who we didn't neuter right away was a little more assertive but neither one really seemed to care. Now both could sound loud and scary if the wrong person tried coming in the yard but for the most part they were both just big babies. 

It's interesting after Shadow passed we got a little lab mix and Buddy was happy to go into the same share/share role with him but we recently picked up another rescue GSD, a female and now Buddy is all about being the regal aloof older gentleman with her. It's kind of funny to watch.


----------



## wolfy dog (Aug 1, 2012)

shepherdmom said:


> The one who we didn't neuter right away was a little more assertive


That's what I would have done too, by leaving the more dominant dog intact you make the hierarchy gap between the two wider and more defined and thus clearer for them.


----------



## Marc (Oct 25, 2012)

gagsd said:


> To be "natural" one of the males would be killed or driven away in all likely hood.


Can you give me some research on this subject because all the research I have done, points to the fact that wolves seldom fight (Usually a show of force and aggression is enough to settle rank disputes), and when they do it very rarely ends in a killing (killings sometimes happen when the other wolves engage with the subordinate), the only time a wolf would be driven from the pack, is if he can not accept his new role in the hierarchy, thus a constant threat to the alpha. Lone wolves are a lot less common than fiction makes them out to be.



wolfy dog said:


> That's what I would have done too, by leaving the more dominant dog intact you make the hierarchy gap between the two wider and more defined and thus clearer for them.


To me this completely makes sense, if I was in this position, I would pick a dog and make it clear to the other dog, that he is above him in the hierarchy, feed him first, let him play with toys first, have the lesser ranked dog castrated. This in my opinion would settle the dispute between these two.


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

Marc said:


> ...., is if he can not accept his new role in the hierarchy, thus a constant threat to the alpha..


I am speaking about my two dogs. We (some breeders) breed these dogs for a level of dominance, not for submission. My two Ari and Anik are very close in temperament. 
1. I do not think it is fair to "make" one dog become the submissive. (I posted that previously).
2. With dogs bred for strong temperament that are of similar strengths, it is less likely for one dog to "accept his new role." 

Of course some males get along. Of course some people can make it work.
The OP is already having issues.
The OP is likely a pretty normal dog owner who does not want to change up their entire living situation.

I can understand and agree with the posters who have recommended rehoming one of the dogs.


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

Marc, you made me go look things up
(and yes, dogs are NOT wolves, I know)

..... 
Third, in the wild, most wolves disperse from their natal packs and attempt to pair with other dispersed wolves, produce pups, and start their own packs (Rothman and Mech 1979; Fritts and Mech 1981; Messier 1985; Mech 1987; Gese and Mech 1991; Mech et al. 1998). I know of no permanent dispersers that failed to breed if they lived long enough.
Wolves do show considerable variation in dispersal age, distance, direction, and other dispersal behavior (see references above), and conceivably these are related to the intralitter variation discussed above (Fox 1971_b_; Fox and Andrews 1973). However, unless a maturing pack member inherits a position that allows it to breed with a stepparent in its own pack (Fritts and Mech 1981; Mech and Hertel 1983), sooner or later it will disperse and attempt to breed elsewhere.
Wolf Status and Dominance in Packs -Alpha Status

So far the articles I have read all state that the lower ranking members of a wolf pack eventually leave and start their own pack.....
http://www.wolfweb.com/facts-pack.html

http://www.biokids.umich.edu/critters/Canis_lupus/


----------



## Marc (Oct 25, 2012)

gagsd said:


> I am speaking about my two dogs. We (some breeders) breed these dogs for a level of dominance, not for submission. My two Ari and Anik are very close in temperament.
> 1. I do not think it is fair to "make" one dog become the submissive. (I posted that previously).
> 2. With dogs bred for strong temperament that are of similar strengths, it is less likely for one dog to "accept his new role."
> 
> ...


Yes it makes a lot of sense for one of the animals to be rehomed, But I always feel bad for both the owner (especially if they do not want to be rehomed) and for the animal, since it wants to be with its owners. I suppose in a lot of cases, there is no other option, and I agree with that, but personally if I was in that position, I think I would atleast try modifying the hierarchy of the group.

Those links were very informative, I will bookmark them  personally, I tend not to differentiate between dogs and wolves, since they differ in genetics by such a small amount, however I get that I dont have a wolf sleeping at my feet lol. And your right, it is less likely for a dog to accept his new role, since he has been bred for dominance, and is of similar physical and mental dispotion of his brother.

It was a theory... a theory with a lot of wholes, its possible it might work, but seems unlikely. But I will say that most wolves will stay with their family for atleast 3 years before starting their own packs, so they must be pretty comfortable with their rank for those 3 years


----------



## carmspack (Feb 2, 2011)

"But I always feel bad for both the owner (especially if they do not want to be rehomed) and for the animal, since it wants to be with its owners" and sometimes neither one is really "into it" (as in he's not really in to you) , because the dog is too emotionally invested in the other dog , and the owner is too invested , time and interest , in a job or personal priorities , so the dogs sort of raise each other, become very doggy. If the dog is not removed he may never fully develop that bond with a person .


----------



## MaggieRoseLee (Aug 17, 2001)

Just so you realize you are not alone and in a fairly common situation (reason why most responsible breeders never consider homing two pups to the same home). For a heads up and more info just click ---> http://www.germanshepherds.com/foru...67994-should-i-get-two-puppies-dogs-once.html

aw:


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

Marc said:


> Yes it makes a lot of sense for one of the animals to be rehomed, But I always feel bad for both the owner (especially if they do not want to be rehomed) and for the animal, since it wants to be with its owners.


But an animal can form new bonds in an environment that is better suited to its overall happiness and well-being.

I do feel sympathy for the owner, as there will be an emotional attachment to both dogs, and choosing one over the other has to be very difficult. But I don't feel bad for the dogs--once each is in a separate household with different owners, they will no longer have the stress and strife that causes them to fight, and will no doubt be happier dogs in the long run.

In my opinion, the decision on which one to keep should be based on logical reasoning. Relying on emotions to make a decision is always fraught, and sometimes so difficult that it comes down to essentially flipping a coin, because you simply cannot make the decision. 

Which dog is better suited to your family and lifestyle? Which one would be more adoptable? Which one would adapt better to a new home? These are the questions that should be considered.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

carmspack said:


> "But I always feel bad for both the owner (especially if they do not want to be rehomed) and for the animal, since it wants to be with its owners" and sometimes neither one is really "into it" (as in he's not really in to you) , because the dog is too emotionally invested in the other dog , and the owner is too invested , time and interest , in a job or personal priorities , so the dogs sort of raise each other, become very doggy. If the dog is not removed he may never fully develop that bond with a person .


?? We've had up to 5 dogs at the same time, they all have had their person. They have had to share of course and some are more bonded to us than others, some like spending time with the other dogs. They all are safe, loved, vetted and well cared for. I don't feel like any are missing out on anything.


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

shepherdmom said:


> ?? We've had up to 5 dogs at the same time, they all have had their person. They have had to share of course and some are more bonded to us than others, some like spending time with the other dogs. They all are safe, loved, vetted and well cared for. I don't feel like any are missing out on anything.


It's not that they're necessarily "missing out" on anything. If your dog never leaves the property, doesn't bother anyone, and has plenty of room to exercise, is fed and safe and vetted, there's nothing wrong with a dog being "doggy" and not particularly bonded to any human. In fact, some dogs work better when they are not too bonded to humans (Livestock Guardians, etc). 

But some of us want more than that from our dogs, we want a stronger bond, a dog we know will trust and respect us. A dog we can take anywhere, anytime, and we know it will behave itself. To say nothing of the dogs that have real-life jobs like SAR, Law Enforcement, guide work, etc. That takes work, and if there is little to no bond between the dog and the person, it takes a lot MORE work, if it works at all.

In fact I remember reading about one of the guide-dog organizations, early on in their experimental raising and training of guide dog puppies. Pups that were raised with another dog, either their littermate, parent, or other dog close in age, consistently failed the guide tests. They simply didn't care about humans enough to work for them.

If you don't need or expect that from a dog, then you can get away with letting them be more dog-oriented than human-oriented.


----------



## shepherdmom (Dec 24, 2011)

Freestep said:


> It's not that they're necessarily "missing out" on anything. If your dog never leaves the property, doesn't bother anyone, and has plenty of room to exercise, is fed and safe and vetted, there's nothing wrong with a dog being "doggy" and not particularly bonded to any human. In fact, some dogs work better when they are not too bonded to humans (Livestock Guardians, etc).
> 
> But some of us want more than that from our dogs, we want a stronger bond, a dog we know will trust and respect us. A dog we can take anywhere, anytime, and we know it will behave itself. To say nothing of the dogs that have real-life jobs like SAR, Law Enforcement, guide work, etc. That takes work, and if there is little to no bond between the dog and the person, it takes a lot MORE work, if it works at all.
> 
> ...


Well I'm out on acres so my dogs don't bother anyone, but they do leave the property for vet visits or camping trips etc. They have in the past done 4-h obedience and agility and worked just fine. I expect them to be well mannered (no jumping on people, no begging and that type of stuff) and leash trained and the ones that wanted to play (i.e. agility/obedience) got to. Kids are all grown so no more 4-h but am thinking of what I can do to keep Ivan occupied as my shepherds are older and more reserved.


----------



## Freestep (May 1, 2011)

Household manners, vet visits, 4-H, that sort of thing, can be acheived even with a "doggy" dog, as long as that dog is of a good, safe, and biddable temperament, and well socialized. A lot depends on breed, too.

When you get into higher levels of competition or real-life work, the subtle differences between a dog-oriented dog and a human-oriented dog become more apparent.

The thing you have to be aware of with multiple dogs raising each other and running together, is that they have a pack mentality. If they are more dog-bonded than human-bonded, if it ever comes down to a human vs. pack worst case scenario, they're going to go with the pack. Meaning, if they all decide to go through a hole in the fence and attack the neighbor's sheep, you can yell and scream until you're blue in the face and your dogs will likely ignore you.

An experienced person can succesfully have several well-behaved, well-trained dogs run together (depending on breed), if each dog is worked and trained individually. But many people simply get two puppies "to keep each other company", because they DON'T have as much time to spend with each one, and they figure they will entertain and exercise each other. Which works great, until those puppies reach adolescence and start fighting, or become so bonded to each other that they do not care about humans and cannot be separated from each other.


----------

