A dog is not a wolf !

peasant

Well ...D'oh ...we all know that, don't we?

So how come everybody keeps mentioning wolf behaviour when it comes to explaining dog behaviour?

Wolf to dog is as similar (and as different) as is chimpanzee to human.

Comparable in a lot of ways when looking at the broad strokes, yet significantly different in detail.

Some of the differences between wolves and dogs:

- dogs do NOT live in packs, they live in groups. A pack is centred around a "family" core of related animals. Outsiders join and family members leave occasionally but the family core remains. A group on the other hand is a random assembly of unrelated animals and in case of the family dog most members of the group aren't even dogs.

- dogs don't need to fend for themselves. They are fed, cared for and protected by us humans. Which allows them the "luxury" to develop non-essential behaviour (essential for survival that is), like play, interrupted huntig (aka herding), the giving up of prey (aka retrieving) etc

- dogs have adapted to humans. They have learned to read human body languague, understand commands and most importantly, how to display puppy-like behaviour throughout their lives to keep us sweet and themselves fed (begging is the best example for this, grown wolves do not beg from each other, only wolf pups display this behaviour)


But now for the real "news":

Wolves aren't wolves either ...or at least not as we (think) we know them.

The theories about wolf packs and their strictly hirarchical pecking order that are doing the rounds and form the basis of many a dog training book are simply wrong!

The studies that formed the basis of these theories were made on wolves in captivity.
In nature, wolf packs command vast territories, packs are in flux (members leave, outsiders join). In captivity, a large amount of animals is cramped into a small space, there is no escape and no scope for outside influences.

Recent studies on wild wolves have shown that most of the aggressive behaviour previously observed in wolves is down to the constraints of captivity and ...more importantly ...that the strict hirarchical pack structure with its Alpha to Omega pecking order ONLY exists in captivity.

Wild wolf packs do have a social hirachy but it is a lot more complex and a lot more adaptive and flexible than previously observed.


The same is true for dogs in a human environement. The have a social order, but they are capable of so much more than just being either "alpha" or "omega". "Job sharing" between dogs is common. Certain individuals lead on certain tasks, while they step into the background on others.
Apparent "leaders" have no problems handing over leadership for certain specific task to another dog ...and doing so doesn't mean they lose their leadership.

We could learn a lot about and from our dogs, if only we didn't look at them as wolves anymore.

devildriver

Well my dog is half wolf!

peasant

devildriver wrote:

Well my dog is half wolf!

Yipeeeh for you :rolleyes:

devildriver

peasant wrote:

Yipeeeh for you :rolleyes:

Eh thanks! :rolleyes:

Your conversational skills are indeed formidable!:D

Dyr

next week :

cats are not lions!!

peasant

Bambi wrote:

next week :

cats are not lions!!

Strangely enough, most people seem to have copped on to that one

devildriver

I'm eagerly awaiting "Guppies are not Pirahnas".
:eek:

stcatherine

Firstly ....me Sniggers @ next week cats are not lions !!!

Secondly

Cheers peasant, I as a dog owner ( Said dog being a vicious Stafforshire Bull Terrier who is out to kill everybody by whipping them to death with her tail wagging, or the alternative method of licking their noses and ears off their face), appreciate someone pointing out these facts.

I made the mistake of paying a Dog Trainer once to come to my house to help with Dog's separation anxiety, and I got fed the whole dogs and packs tripe. It gives other more sensible trainers a bad name.

Also in support of the Human - Chimps statement

yes we evolved from Monkey's and we don't still swing from trees and de-flea each other on a daily basis, so why can't Dogs have evolved from wolves and no longer feel the need to display wolfish behaviour ?

(thou again I agree such behaviour could very well be attributed to wolves kept in captivity)

I babble ...apologies !!

(just feeling miffed at having moved here and being forced to reclassify my pet as another breed so she doesn't get tarred with the same brush as a handful of other dogs of the same breed ....out of how many thousands ...incidentally ? ..... people murder each other every day ...does that make us all murderers ?) :rolleyes:

8k2q1gfcz9s5d4

what about wolf hounds?:p

SuzyS1972

On another animal forum they offer the one fits all Jan Fennell approach of the whole pack thing

Years ago I went to one of her talks and totally bought into it - then half way thru the book I realised that she was claiming to cure every behavourial problem with the one approach and I researched her methods and realised it was pants.
There are a few little things I would follow like not letting the dogs graze on food but hadve set meal times etc but the whole eating a cracker in front of them to me was just ridiculous

My father thinks he knows everything coz he watches that awful man Ceaser Milan - If I hear about the Alpha male once more I'll eat me terriers

jameshayes

My brother looks like a wolf when theres a full moon, the situation gets a bit hairy when the moon comes out

jameshayes

peasant wrote:

- dogs do NOT live in packs, they live in groups. A pack is centred around a "family" core of related animals. Outsiders join and family members leave occasionally but the family core remains. A group on the other hand is a random assembly of unrelated animals and in case of the family dog most members of the group aren't even dogs.

On a serious note,

This is true but We are a dogs group, there is always gonna be a leader in the family - and sometimes a dog can think he is the leader.

The best way to test which of your family is the leader, get your family to stand in a line facing your dog (which is held on a lead by a neutral) and everyone call the dog.. when the dog is released he will go to the leader... you'd think he would go to the person who plays with him the most or to the person who feeds him, but he might go to the family member who is least familiar with the dog... Try it and see... (it normally only works on males, and not pups cause there group nature hasn't come to light yet)

peasant

jameshayes wrote:

everyone call the dog.. when the dog is released he will go to the leader...

True, but a slight re-phrasing might be necessary:

The dog goes to the one it takes most seriously ...whether that person "leads" anything other than dog is another matter

peasant

SuzyS1972 wrote:

...Jan Fennell ....Ceaser Milan...

Yeah ...that's another interesting one. For hundreds, no thousands, of years man and dog got along just fine.

These days you have dog "listeners", "whisperers", "nannies", "experts", "trainers" and affairs are worse than ever.

lightening

devildriver wrote:

Well my dog is half wolf!

Did you rescue it? Who bred it? Is it neutered/spayed?

cowzerp

Peasant i totally disagree with you,
Dogs are like wolves if left to there own devices-the difference is there socialised into our family (packs) and understand there place in the pack if socialised properly, the same can happen to wolves if took in as pups, thats how domestic dogs came about anyway-Wolves are not bad animals but just dogs that live by the law of the wild, saying dogs are like wolves is not an insult either,
chimps cant breed with humans like wolves can with our domestic dogs, thats because there still very much the same genetically-socially the change is because humans and training, plus breeding for certain traits that breeders wanted.

Dyr

peasant wrote:

Yeah ...that's another interesting one. For hundreds, no thousands, of years man and dog got along just fine.

These days you have dog "listeners", "whisperers", "nannies", "experts", "trainers" and affairs are worse than ever.

IMO opinion its primarily because our lifestyles in the west have changed so much in such a short span. Dogs dont fit in properly anymore.

Annika30

Barry Eatons book Dominance: fact or fiction? is a good read about the subject.

Alfasudcrazy

I have noticed that my two female dogs seem to classify themselves as the leaders. The female dobie being chief and the female collie being her ever loyal deputy. If the female dobie barks the collie has to let off a few as well even if she does not know what she is barking at.

I see this when the male dobie who is by far bigger then his sister gives way when she wants to eat from the dish he is eating from. He does this too with the collie.

They are constantly perplexed though why I always seem to go to him first. I must admit he is my favourite of the three. He is identical in appearance and character to my last poor doberman Jacko who died of cancer in 1996.:(

peasant

cowzerp

maybe I should have re-phrased the title a bit:

"Dogs are not the wolves we make them out to be"

Fact is ...the wolves we believe to have understood, them of high aggressiveness and hirarchical structure simply do not exist like that in the wild.

Therefore it is pointless to try and apply a hirarchical structure to your dogs, when normally they wouldn't have one.

Don't get me wrong ...dogs need a leader and they look for one too, but their leader (you, hopefully) must have other qualifications than simply insist on eating first or be the first out of the door

alexdenby6

my gsd greets me in the exact same way that jan fennell describes the way wolves greet thye alpha in packs. ears back, and licking face.

peasant

Does he also regurtitate part of his food for your children?

Rigsby

IMO dogs dont behave like wolves because they have been domesticated by man. Having said that the wolf instinct lies dorment beneath the surface and can be triggered by certain circumstances.
It has been reported that after a disaster (earthquakes ect) when dogs have been left to their own devices for a long period they form packs and hunt for food. I have also witnessed domestic dogs in packs (some very small) worring sheep. Is this not wolf-like behaviour ?

alexdenby6

no because she has no pups. and i am the child.

peasant

Is this not wolf-like behaviour ?

It is indeed ...except for the fact that they don't hunt in "packs" but in "groups"

A PACK is a extended family unit (like a tribe), a GROUP is just that, a grouping of likeminded individuals (like a club)

cowzerp

peasant wrote:

cowzerp

maybe I should have re-phrased the title a bit:

"Dogs are not the wolves we make them out to be"

Don't get me wrong ...dogs need a leader and they look for one too, but their leader (you, hopefully) must have other qualifications than simply insist on eating first or be the first out of the door

Agreed

Rigsby

peasant wrote:

It is indeed ...except for the fact that they don't hunt in "packs" but in "groups"

A PACK is a extended family unit (like a tribe), a GROUP is just that, a grouping of likeminded individuals (like a club)

Point taken. Nonetheless the similarity remains in that they are prepared to work as a team for the common benefit of that team wheather they are related or not. Besides, outsiders are sometimes accepted into the "pack". If these abandoned domestic dogs were left alone for long enough I'm fairly sure they would develop a ranking order...... just the same as the wolf. Then if this "group" were to have offspring they would eventually become a "pack" would they not ? Which brings us back to my original statement that the wolf instinct is just below the surface.

wyk

Care to cite your sources?

Wez

peasant wrote:

Well ...D'oh ...we all know that, don't we?

So how come everybody keeps mentioning wolf behaviour when it comes to explaining dog behaviour?

Wolf to dog is as similar (and as different) as is chimpanzee to human.

Comparable in a lot of ways when looking at the broad strokes, yet significantly different in detail.

Some of the differences between wolves and dogs:

- dogs do NOT live in packs, they live in groups. A pack is centred around a "family" core of related animals. Outsiders join and family members leave occasionally but the family core remains. A group on the other hand is a random assembly of unrelated animals and in case of the family dog most members of the group aren't even dogs.

- dogs don't need to fend for themselves. They are fed, cared for and protected by us humans. Which allows them the "luxury" to develop non-essential behaviour (essential for survival that is), like play, interrupted huntig (aka herding), the giving up of prey (aka retrieving) etc

- dogs have adapted to humans. They have learned to read human body languague, understand commands and most importantly, how to display puppy-like behaviour throughout their lives to keep us sweet and themselves fed (begging is the best example for this, grown wolves do not beg from each other, only wolf pups display this behaviour)


But now for the real "news":

Wolves aren't wolves either ...or at least not as we (think) we know them.

The theories about wolf packs and their strictly hirarchical pecking order that are doing the rounds and form the basis of many a dog training book are simply wrong!

The studies that formed the basis of these theories were made on wolves in captivity.
In nature, wolf packs command vast territories, packs are in flux (members leave, outsiders join). In captivity, a large amount of animals is cramped into a small space, there is no escape and no scope for outside influences.

Recent studies on wild wolves have shown that most of the aggressive behaviour previously observed in wolves is down to the constraints of captivity and ...more importantly ...that the strict hirarchical pack structure with its Alpha to Omega pecking order ONLY exists in captivity.

Wild wolf packs do have a social hirachy but it is a lot more complex and a lot more adaptive and flexible than previously observed.


The same is true for dogs in a human environement. The have a social order, but they are capable of so much more than just being either "alpha" or "omega". "Job sharing" between dogs is common. Certain individuals lead on certain tasks, while they step into the background on others.
Apparent "leaders" have no problems handing over leadership for certain specific task to another dog ...and doing so doesn't mean they lose their leadership.

We could learn a lot about and from our dogs, if only we didn't look at them as wolves anymore.

peasant

wyk wrote:

Care to cite your sources?

Wez

for example:

During the winter and spring of 2005 and the winter of 2006, I observed
captive wolves (Canis lupus) at Northwest Trek (NWT) and free-ranging
wolves at Yellowstone National Park (YNP) to determine whether food
availability had any effect on group dynamics. I focused on two elements:
the display of dominant/aggressive behavior and the enforcement of pack
hierarchy. Food in the form of dry kibble was available continuously at
NWT, whereas wild wolves in YNP were required to hunt for food. I
observed dominant/aggressive behavior only in the captive wolves. Freeranging
wolves were not seen to display dominant/aggressive behavior
towards pack mates, although submissive behavior was documented.

http://academic.evergreen.edu/s/stidav22/reports/WolfBehaviorReport.pdf

also:
http://psyc.queensu.ca/ccbr/Vol2/Kubinyi.pdf

peasant

Rigsby wrote:

Which brings us back to my original statement that the wolf instinct is just below the surface.

Instinct (wolf or otherwise) isn't just below the surface but very much present.

My (unsientific) guestimate would be that "normal" dog behaviour is 50% channeled instinct and 50% training ...100% instinct when things go wrong or out of control.

No denying that a dog has instincts and acts on them. No denying either that dogs live in a social structure, they actually need a social structure.

What I'm disputing (or trying to:D ) is the so called "fact" that this structure is based on a violent, aggression based Alpha down to Omega pecking order like so many "dog gurus" wont to make us believe.

This behaviour model introduces unneccesary aggresion into the human-dog relationship. You don't need to dominate your dog(s) ...just lead them.
Wrongly applied/misunderstood dominant behaviour of dog owners is also the cause of a lot of dog aggression.

Wolves in the wild (unlike those in captivity) need to pour all their energy into surviving. They literally have no time and/or energy to waste on needless fighting amongst themselves. They have developed rituals and mechanisms to avoid conflict and to enable them to work together. (Rather than having to have one watchful eye on each other constantly)

This is the wolf that is still in our dogs ...a highly skilled social animal, willing to be led and willing to be integrated as a part of the group.

But teachers of the old wolf theory (that of the domint agressive pecking order) are doing their worst to teach us humans behaviour and training methods that will ultimately stress the most co-operative and willing dog beyond breaking point.

wyk

That's a good read. Thank you.

I understand your point. And I do see a lot of Wolf in the dog, but the dog certainly is no wolf. However, understanding pack dynamics in captured Wolves goes a long way in understanding those same dynamics in a pack of dogs. When food and shelter are guaranteed, dogs can spend much more energy and time sorting out their pecking order. It is up to their Human custodians to make sure it is understood that they are the alphas, and that aggression of any type will not be rewarded.

This takes a lot of patience and understanding, as well as consistency. People need to understand that dogs do not reason as people do. A dog may not be a wolf, but dogs are more wolf than human. Understanding how a pack works, how to lead the pack, or your dog, will help to keep peace and order. Heavy-handed tactics often backfire, as it makes the dog more defensive and react more instinctual, which rarely facilitates learning. A firm hand on a collar and controlling the dog well enough so it knows who is boss is often enough on a more aggressive and larger breed. Some trainers do not think showing dominance by pinning the dog is effective. I, personally, haven't met a dog with whom this was not very highly effective. Simply holding the dog firmly by the collar and pulling it to the ground or to the side so that it submits usually quickly defuses any situation, or bad behavior in my experience. With Greyhounds I have found simply using a stern voice more than enough. I have a friend with an English Bulldog that ignores him, but listens to me. He refuses to control the dog by the collar as I do because he loves it so much. He allows me to 'train' it when I am around because it marvels him. Whatever - It takes a LOT of repetition with the EB, but he will not jump on me, or approach me unless I request it of him. Meanwhile the EB feels free to jump upon, slobber, sit on, or ignore my mate. It's his dog, and it's his prerogative - the lazy bastard. But if his dog got loose, and I am not there, he won't come back when called...or if he attacks and grabs hold of someone's Chihuaha, he won't let go on command - one of the things I train all my dogs to do with a chew rope I use. One of the most important aspects of training a dog properly isn't just a healthy relationship and peace in the home, but the fact you may have to use commands in an emergency situation(your dog gets loose, runs, is attacking someone elses dog, etc.

Some would argue a dog goes into 100% instinct mode when attacking, but I have been successful at calling off all my Greyhounds and my Komondorok from an attack, where it was not evenly matched, that is. So training a domestic dog can go deep...enough to supercede instinct sometimes.

BTW, most of my dogs are on a ranch, which is how they come into attacking on occasion. The Greys keep the varmints off, the Koms keep the larger critters away, like coyotes, other dogs, and people. In town in my apt I have a Greyhound and a Kom.

In a nutshell, the most important thing for training a dog is patience, identifying the behavior, whether good or bad, and rewarding it, or punishing it fairly, the INSTANT it occurs. And do this consistently.

Wez

peasant wrote:

for example:



http://academic.evergreen.edu/s/stidav22/reports/WolfBehaviorReport.pdf

also:
http://psyc.queensu.ca/ccbr/Vol2/Kubinyi.pdf