Dog owners: would you use a behaviourist who doesn't believe in rank reduction techniques?

[Vacua]

that's it really, I can't find one in my area who uses anything other than wolf pack hierarchy to understand and change problem behaviour in domestic dogs

I'm studying canine psychology with a view to part time practise later this year and am increasingly disenchanted with the idea of humans assuming alpha status within some weird human/dog pack. The idea of setting boundaries and teaching manners through positive reinforcement type training makes more sense to me, but in the age of Cesar Millan and that Jan Fennell would such a stance be commercially viable?

in the sense that it's just good manners not to beg for food, barge through doors before you, pull on the lead, monopolise the furniture and so on

by different name and different method and from different viewpoint - I just can't see how a dog's brain, which is so unlike a wolf's, could possibly operate along the same lines.

what do dogs actually have in common with their genetic ancestors these days? I can't find much that persuades me - but yeah, probably very little difference in terms of the behaviour you want to end up with!

(I suppose I could always change my mind if this approach is a total disaster )

thanks wiimii for your view

I could be wrong, but I thought that when domesticated dogs become feral they DO behave like wolves and form packs.

But dogs still have the wolf pack mentality.
Problem behaviour occurs when things are not how they would be in a pack IMO.

We have just had Jan Fennel training and it just makes so much sense and above all it works.

I'd have two things to say about it. One is that I dislike any notion of alpha status that involves machismo and showy self-assertion. That's not how it is in the wild. I'd have sympathy with any trainer who emphasised a quite, non-confrontational concept of alpha status.

But secondly, and perhaps more important, is that dogs are all so different from one another, and so suit different methods. My current dog, a PRT, is very heirarchically minded, he really is. It makes training both vital and very effective. But my last dog, a Spinone, seemed blind to heirarchy. His breeding, I think, emphasised the communial, cooperative hunting behaviours of pack dogs, rather than the hierarchy of the pack. He was a little sod to train, but when he was sniffing after pheasants he always looked to me and responded to my behaviour closely, because in his mind we were hunting together.

So I'd say, alpha status is important but perhaps not the only natural influence on dogs' trainability.

I'd be suspicious of a trainer who said 'no' to alpha-establishing methods, but with the relevant kind of dog I would welcome someone who had more than this one string to her bow.

(And you mention positive reinforcement as an alternative. Positive reinforcement is clearly vital and central, but not an alternative to the alpha-seeking appproach? They are complementary I guess??

I think your view is closest to my own threadworm - I reject rank reduction as a one size fits all approach. But I mustn't overlook the whole pack mentality thing, I think we do form some sort of pack with our dogs but one in which the dogs recognise us as different species with different behaviours. They haven't been socialised with wolves and therefore not exposed to the notion that as they mature they must begin to jostle with one another for a higher rank.

I like the idea of treating each dog as an individual, and I do concede that there is more wolf in some breeds than others and that this should inform any attempts to address problems.

(gives self medal for having such an open mind )

thanks rantmum and nbq - I don't know about feral dogs but I know the dog whisperer approaches do work for some. Have also seen some unhappy, flat and confused dogs, perhaps as a result of incorrectly applied methods? or perhaps it's just not for all.

I wonder how you assess a dog's amenability to various forms of training/remediation without too much confusing experimentation?

Hope it works out. Would be good to emphasise the flexible approach, tailoring method to dog.

This business of dogs being socialised to species onther than their own is strange,, isn't it. Not only can they be socialised to humans, but the sheepguarding breeds in Europe were traditionally left among sheep as tiny pups so that they would be socialised to sheep.

I don't believe dogs see us as two-legged dogs, any more than sheepguarding dogs see sheep as dogs. (But I still think the alpha thing is a key though not the only training tool.)

thatnks for your good wishes and thoughts threadworm - and for helping me clarify my own thoughts. It's (some/most of) the techniques for rank reduction that I'm not in favour of I suppose, as well as some of the theories underpinning them.

Can't disregard the fact that some people are happy with the results of using them though. I expect the next wave of training/rehabilitation to have evolved a little bit beyond it, I think it's already underway.

(would like to have been socialised with and by wolves myself though)

I don't know much about it really, so I'm not sure about the rank reduction techniques that you dislike. I do remember from my childhood that my parents took our wayward (and agressive) jack russell to atraining class, where the (male) trainer made the dog lie down then loudly whacked a rolled-up newspaper either side of the dog repeatedly, while shouting and grimacing. Hideous! Didn't work of course!

am not keen on that sort of aversive technique either!

I can't remember official term for it but stuff like pretending to eat from their bowl, only acknowledging the dog when YOU initiate contact (although ignoring mine before I go out and when I come in has stopped his separation anxiety and excited weeing all over my feet!), I think the latter is really sad and the first is ridiculous. Have theory that main reason people see results once they embark on this sort of programme is simply from engaging with their dog a bit more and bonding with them through basic training.

As an aside, people who need behavioural consultations are probably not well up on all the theories anyway?

Jan Fennels methods aren't showy or nasty in any way.

I agree that in the wild dogs do not fight or are aggressive as this weakens the pack so its a last resort for them.

I wonder if perhaps all this stuff is so subtle that it would only really work if you were an immensely dedicated, perceptive, and empathetic animal researcher living with wolves. Otherwise, good in theory but not really helpful?

And the people having most problems are probably the ones least able to engage in the necessary subtlety and perception?

It must be hard for dogs to read these sorts of cues from humans, because humans are just so different, bodily, from wolves.

My naughty little dog is very keyed up about certain signs of rank, I think. If the electric fire is on (which he loves) he growls very quietly when the children come into the room. So I make him leave the fireside and sometimes get the kids to sit by the fire for a while. If I get close to the fire he slinks away, as if afraid of challenging me for it.

I used to worry about the growling, but I think that observing all the signs of rank (plus constantly keeping it in mind that he is not ever going to be the sort of dog that children can be safely keft unsupervised with) has made things ok. He is very obediant for the children and has never snapped at them.