Pack theory

[ChickensHaveNoEyebrows]

Not a thread about a thread, but spawned by it iyswim.

I had a dog growing up. I remember clearly being told by just about everyone that the dog had to know it was bottom of the pecking order, so was fed last, not allowed on seats etc. She was a fab little dog and never any problem. My father would tap her on the nose with a rolled up newspaper when she was a pup to chastise her for whatever behaviour he thought undesirable (peeing in the house, stealing food etc). She learned not to do these things.

Now I have a puppy, and we go to training classes. My trainer is all about rewarding the good and ignoring the bad, and I am persevering. That's not to say I haven't gone 'Oh, Jasper!' when I spot him piddling on the rug or bin diving, but I haven't and won't go down the newspaper route. He is a good pup considering, and eager to please. I am still not allowing him on the furniture or feeding him from the table, though, as to me that just sensible (in that I want him to realise he is not allowed to do everything the human contingent can).

I have noticed that he's more apt to listen to me, though, and will try and steal food from the DC's. So should I totally throw the 'pack' idea out of my head? How do I make sure that he knows the boundaries within our home? And how do I make sure that he respects and listens to the DC as well as me?

Yep totally throw it out of your head and read

The Culture Club Jean Donaldson
Don't shoot the Dog Karen Pyror
In Defence of the Dog John Bradshaw

You will never ever again even consider the old, disproven pack dog and dominant theory.

So dogs don't work on a dominance level?

Yes totally throw out the pack theory. I have three dogs.

Dog1 would eat me if I tried pack theory on him.
Dog2 would just raise her eyebrows at me and go back to sleeping/theiving food.
Dog3 would literally wet herself with fear if I so much as raised my voice at her.

Keep doing what you are doing. Dogs will not waste energy on things that don't get them rewards. So if you reward the good and ignore the bad, the bad will stop and the good will increase.

Get the dc involved in training him. Simple fetch games or parctising commands he already knows. He steals food from them and not you because it is easier to steal from them than it is from you. It has nothing to do with respect.

Does throwing out the pack idea mean you can't 'tell him/her off'? I didn't know that. I don't ever physically punish but I have 'used the voice' which makes him look apologetic .

Our dog looks to me more than anyone else. I don't think that's a pack response - simply knowing that I am the one who walks him

Some friends of ours had a collie once - and when the children were born they trained him to take his place as the lowest of the low - the children were encouraged to take his food bowl away from him while he was eating and if he growled he was put outside and smacked . He turned out to be the most neurotic dog I ever knew.

Shall we have another resounding chorus of 'read The Culture Clash'?

My dogs obey me pretty much all of the time but often totally ignore my DP (or, if I didn't know better, I'd think they deliberately rile him sometimes). I've always attributed this to the fact that I do all of their training, walking, discipline etc. - he does only the odd bit of affection.

So, I'd say the answer for your last question would be to heavily involve the DCs in training the dog with you. I suppose it depends how old they are but something as simple as challenging them to teach the dog a cool trick (play dead is a good one) will get them involved and the dog working for them.

I shout if I catch them doing something they shouldn't be doing like raiding the bins. It startles them into stopping. I never get physical with them and only shout if I actually catch them in the act, never after the fact as they wouldn't link me shouting with a bin already raided an hour earlier. They'd just think I was making noise.

I believe it's known as negative reinforcement i.e. it reinforces the idea that if they put their nose in the bin I will make a god awful noise that will scare the crap out of them, so they don't do it when I am home.

Also Barry Eaton Dominance in dogs fact or fiction is worth a read.

The trouble is the average person has a dog for maybe 10 years and then when they get a new dog they remember how that dog was so called trained. Things have developed over this period (think how society has changed as well) and dog training and behaviour is one of them. I must say for the better positive based training methods are the way forward without a doubt and I see it proven on a daily basis.

A dog wants to please - this is generally how the domestic dog evolved. Dogs worked out that if they adapted to humans ways they got benefits from the humans. This goes right back to cave men when some wild dogs/wolves hung around the humans camp as they got food. If they behaved in an acceptable manner they got more food eg looked lovingly at cave people they got more titbits! (See where the labrador gets it from!). Cavemen worked out that dogs would work for reward so started to take them hunting with them etc etc etc. The rest is history
Dog and man adapted together to work together to the benefit of each other. eg Positive reward training.

If the human started to hit or punish the dog they would leave that area and go and find, work for other humans that did not.

This is hugely simplified but shows how the relationship between dogs and men evolved.

No pack theory at all wolves are wolves dogs are dogs

I've been reading a lot of Ian Dunbar and everything just seems to make sense and pup has been responding really well.

Anyone else recommend his way of training?

I used Ian Dunbar's website and book. Pup is now 6 months and doing well (apart from stealing food and 'counter surfing' but I haven't put in enough effort to deal with those properly so it's my fault, not his!).

It's depressing just how many people still stick doggedly (see what I did there?) to the pack theory crap.

Trouble is, it's only the people who have a real fascination with dogs/training/behaviour who tend to research properly, and therefore find out that pack theory is outdated and disproved, and learn about what the more modern behaviourists/scientists have learned.

There are far more people who are interested enough to have a dog, and remember Barbara Woodhouse, but not much beyond that. They aren't interested enough to find out the latest, updated methods. Therefore the old methods get passed around more frequently, and so it goes on.

My DC are involved in training, feeding, grooming our 2 dogs. They adore the children, love me, but for pupstar my DH is the absolute best. She just loves him so much, despite me doing most of the training/walking she has 'chosen' him and it is quite funny.

Loofa is mine, always will be mine and is currently lying under my legs.

My advice is get the children involved in the day to day stuff.

I'll apologise for length now!
I've worked with many many dogs, i worked in rescue with everything from adorable puppies to killing machines on death row. I have rescued many dogs privately that would have not benefited at all from being in rescue centres as they needed one on one attention to address behaviour issues, and sadly in a some cases mental problems. All of these dogs left me to their new owners as good kind dogs. I did home checks and got veterinary references for all of them, and did not make any money from it at all. I have my own 2 dogs that never put a foot wrong and the rescue dogs did well with us as my dogs were "leading by example". I have an 8 year old rough collie cross who has been with me all her life, and a 2 year old ex breeding rough collie who had never lived in a house before.
I'm not stating this to imply I have more experience or know better than anybody else here, I just thought I'd give you some background on what experience I have and how my methods have worked. I'm always open to new ideas and love hearing other peoples tricks/tips and advice!

I think the pack theory does have a place and that respect is something you should earn from the dog by the care you give and being a calm, confident and consistent leader. The dog should do as you ask because he respects you and trusts the choices you make for him. These dont have to be reached through negative reinforcement, infact something like agility classes work very well.

I also believe that prevention is better than cure in a lot of cases, for example if the dog is stealing from children he gets his "reward" because he gets the food, ignoring this would only lead to him doing it more as he got older/bigger and obviously it will make him pushy around the children, dogs aren't stupid and he will soon learn what time is meal time and perfect the art waiting until your back is turned. At this point, telling the dog off would be uneffective, as he has his reward from the food and wont understand why you are annoyed. It might be a good idea to teach the a dog to go to his bed on command instead, and have the children eat at the table, when no food is forthcoming he will eventually learn to ignore it entirely, if he is allowed at a young age to take from children he will continue to do so. Quite simply a dog that has never learnt this behaviour wont have any compulsion to do it!

I also never use treats when I am training as I think it makes the dog only work when he is being bribed, rather than doing it because he is asked. Sometimes dogs can even learn to repeat negative behaviour (such as running off) as they get a reward upon return. Saying this, I also have dry food down constantly and my dogs eat as and when they need it, I know this wouldnt work for some dogs but it suits mine very well and combined with other methods can be one of the best ways to stop food aggression. There is no need for the dog to worry about losing it, having it taken away, protecting it, as its there all the time. I found this to be very effective in helping a very thin collie i rescued who when i got her would have bitten over food. She calmed down considerably when she realised that food was something that was a given and wasnt about to be stolen from her or about to run out.

The idea of a "pack mentality" is something that i'm afraid is in all dogs, they learn this from a young age when pushing for food with siblings and they quickly develop a pecking order amongst themselves in multi dog households. It is not meant to be an oppressive way of understanding and controling your dog as it has been used in the past. Most dogs learn where they sit in a group and as long as everybody is happy then there should be no negative behaviour from it, a pack is about a co-operation, its how these animals survived for many years and is in all dogs. It can be witnessed in the most simple of gestures, such as my older dog making sure she is the first to the water when we come in from a walk, the others wait turn as she is above them, she doesnt sit higher in the pack because she is given special treatment or because she is aggressive, but because she shows herself to be calm and fair with younger dogs we have rescued.

A problem for some dogs is not being allowed the chance at being taught limits, this is often a problem for dogs that have been seperated from their mother and siblings too early. The mother will use sounds to tell her pups when enough is enough. Puppies that arnt exposed to this often struggle more in training as a result and my have mouthing issues. It is also important for the pup to spend time with siblings as they learn the limits of their mouthing by nipping and thus upsetting their siblings and then being told off for it. This is hugely important to a dogs social developement. It is expressed in play at this age and is essential to a dogs mental growth and understanding of boundaries.

The best way to make sure your dog understands the boundaries in your home is to set rules and never allow them to be broken. Dogs love consistency and if you put a rule in place (such as the dog not being allowed on the sofa) you must make sure that nobody else allows this. If it has never been allowed it is unlikely that the dog will even consider trying it after just a few weeks. If you do want to use a word to express that you aren't happy with the dog (this is entirely up to you) I would recommend a LOW tone, a simple "no" or "Oh dear" in a low voice will get your point accross far better than shouting or screaming that he wouldnt understand and may leave him scared or confused. Low tones work better for this kind of thing as mother dogs use a low grumble to tell pups when a behaviour is unacceptable. If the pup is jumping up use the low toned "no" and dont make eyes contact, keep your hands to yourself and he will understand you perfectly.

It's hard to give you any advice regarding things that would help to make sure he respects your DCs as I'm not sure of ages and obviously how a dog is expected to behave around a toddler is completely different to a teenager that would be fine to walk him and spend time training him. I would advise though that you dont allow the children to give the dog a treat from their hand, instead place it on the floor and then allow the dog to take it. This will pay off later as the dog wont associate your children's hands with food!

Apologies again for length.... I got carried away!

Just remember training a dog takes a lot of time and understanding, and you sound like you are doing really well so far!

Different approaches work for different dogs, I hope this might be of some help.

I've been trying to do a lot of research on Pack Theory type behaviour and training.

From what I've read, it is now thought domesticated dogs do not think in 'pack mentality' ways. That they have evolved their relationship over the centuries to not think of us as their pack and that that is only relevant to wolves and wild dogs?

That they totally accept that we are human and they are dogs and they wont be trying to dominate us at every opportunity?

However I have spent this evening trying to tell my friend this and she thinks this is wrong and that dogs will always want to be leader of the pack if you are a weak person or show weakness to them etc. It seems so difficult to change peoples minds on this whole pack theory, dominance stuff.

Apparently because our puppy paws us for attention that is a clear sign that she wants to be our boss!

We have been letting the children feed our pup treats when they are stroking her and praising her etc. Our oldest DD can get her to sit and lie down. Pup seems to prefer our youngest DD, I think its so she can lick the jam or whatever off her fingers!

Ian Dunbar has a lot of advice on Puppies with Children which i've been reading at the moment.

Hi MiseryBusiness,

I do think a lot depends on the dog itself, I have known the calmest breeds, given correct training at reputable puppy classes in loving family homes and the dogs have turned out to show less then desirable traits, I have also seen aggressive or traumatised rescue dogs be turned into passive pets. I suppose that is down to the whole nature or nurture argument again!

I think through domestication a lot of pack behaviour has been lost, it is not demonstrated in domestic dogs at all like it is in their wild counter parts. I do still think it plays an important role though for some dogs, that need the consistancy of a firm fair handler. I also think though this can be breed related. Some breeds thrive on a pack style heirarchy, while other breeds are more docile and dont associate people as pack, or see them as something to try and be boss over. Obviously there are acceptions within any breed.

I think the dominance your friend is talking about is very misguided, some dogs simply are not dominant at all, so saying all dogs will try to become the pack leader is wrong, it simply isnt in some dogs nature to want to do this. I do think you can find genuinely dominant aggressive dogs though, that will constantly push and test boundaries.

I live in a very rural area and so a lot of the dogs i have taken on have been farm collies that were not good enough to work. They had lived in groups much like wild dogs, where the stronger dogs got more food and kept the younger and weaker dogs below them. They had puppies etc and obviously not all were sold so more dogs ended up living on these yards. I think if a dog has lived with this then it must have understanding of a basic pack structure, i suppose even being encouraged to work could encourage this, and if they were fed after working, this is their "hunt". As these dogs were never kept as house pets and rarely handled, it appeared (to me anyway) that they understood a pack heirarchy much better than they could understand human behaviour. This was entirely down to the first few years of their lives though. This is a sad truth about dogs that arnt handled enough, their lives are so different from the little dog we all picture curled up by the fire, chewing a denta stick.
Some people who train working dogs use a pressure system, the dog is kept under constant pressure and when the desired behaviour is exhibited the pressure is released, usualling through tactics that involve dominating the dog using body language. This also enforces the "pack" mentality in dogs like these.

I think some dogs must just have a clearer understanding of what is another dog and what isnt. I've also known an akita that was an entire male, and honestly thought he ruled the roost. He would do anything he wanted, including dominance humping of guests and the persons children! He also used to "back chat" basically if he was to be taken for a walk and he didnt want to go, or was asked to do anything, he would forcebly bark and nip towards the owners. All very distressing as you can imagine. He was never abused or neglected, he just thought that he should not have to listen to anybody there. He would also try to prevent the family from leaving the house! The dog displayed this behaviour to bully the family, as he had already asserted himself and knew that he could do what he wanted and walk all over them.

These are exceptional cases though and the majority of dogs wont display behaviour anything like this!!!!!!!! I can't stress that enough.

As for you letting your children feed the dog treats, this is fine if your dog is usually good about food and if its not at meal times etc. But the OP mentioned that the dog would try to steal from the children. I think that most kids end up walking around with chocolate or sweets in their hands, and if this is the case it can be a good idea to not let the dog eat from their hands at all. Crying children because the dog has snatched the sandwich/cake/crisps etc is one thing, but a seriously sick puppy all because it managed to take a chocolate bar is another.

Hi hickerybobp.

To be honest I dont know a lot about dog behaviour and have only owned one breed of dog, Dalmatian's which if you yourself have had much contact with are notoriously tactile and human orientated dogs so maybe they dont display many pack traits from their past.

We do let the children give puppy treats when she sits etc and I totally understand about her maybe thinking its ok to take food from them but we have been teaching her to sit and wait and then inviting her to come and take the treat. The kids have eaten biscuits etc everyday sometimes around her and although her head pops up she doesnt (yet) tried to take anything.

For a Dalmatian she isnt too food motivated, enough to train but not enough for her to be protective of her food or treats at all. Only myself or my husband feed her dinner.

There is so much conflicting information out there these days!

I apologise for having only skim-read the thread.

When I first qualified as a vet, the pack theory was in full swing. 16 years later, things have changed. I have changed my stance accordingly.

I agree there is a "pack mentality" between dogs, BUT I also now accept that dogs are capable of acknowleging humans as humans, not as other dogs. And this has changed my outlook on canine behaviour immensely.

I now favour behaviouralists who examine why the dog is exhibiting a behaviour which may be annoying to the owner but which is intrinsically natural to the dog. Breed is a real factor, as is remembering what the dog was bred for and accepting that and trying to incorporate it into your life, as opposed to trying to knock it out of the dog and trying to make it fit into your lifestyle. You buy a herding breed and then and then don't want it to herd. Or a warning breed and then expect to be able to train it not to bark.

the move is to trying to get people to be a bit more accepting of the breed that they have chosen, and working to find an outlet for those behaviours which have been bred into over hundreds of years.

We, as humans, go out and choose a dog. We then expect it to fit a set of behaviours that we lay out, regardless of what the dog's intrinsic behaviours are. We have to see that this is slightly skewed. Things like toilet-training- fair enough. But you will not make an aggressive dog submissive by "dominating" it. It is a recipe for disaster, and I, for one, am happy to change what I was originally taught, as the new ideas make more sense than the old, IMO

A dog who obeys a command/cue is doing it for one reason, and one reason only. Because he thinks that obeying either a) GAINS something desirable or b) Avoids something unpleasant.

The pleasant thing doesn't have to be a treat. Some dogs work best for praise, some work better for toys and some work better for food. A dog who has never had a treat in his life isn't obeying "just because he should" - you can be sure that something happens that he likes, and that he sees as worth working for.

Some behaviourists dispute the "wanting to please" thing totally; why should the dog care a hoot about the inner workings of the human mind? Sure, when you're pleased with the dog, you are happy - and the dog learns pretty quickly that when you're happy, Nice Things tend to happen. But that again comes down to the dog working for a reward.

Ultimately, for the dog it's a case of "What's in it for me?"

At the moment we are using treats about 50/50.

Our puppy thrives more on human attention, she'd do just about anything for a cuddle! Somtimes I think she'd be happiest if I wore her round my neck or something!

I don't think any decent trainer/behaviourist would advocate ignoring that sort of behaviour. It is only worth ignoring unwanted behaviour that isn't rewarding.

Even ignoring barking, for example, won't always work - because barking is, in itself, a pretty self-rewarding behaviour. Dogs just seem to like the sound of their own voices sometimes. It's a way of letting off steam.

Same with jumping up - simply ignoring the dog isn't always enough because ultimately, jumping up is achieving the dog's goal - to be closer to the human's face. Crossing arms and turning away however, helps. As does making having four feet on the floor VERY rewarding.

CalamityKate- as someone who, until recently, owned 2 beagles (now only 1, sadly) I totally understand how you have to give and take a bit according to breed! Mine spent their lives with their noses to the ground.

A mantra I like, where dogs are concerned, is "Dogs Do What Works".

My dog went through a stage of staring at me. Hard. Just standing in the kitchen staring at me and, occasionally, shifting from foot to foot restlessly. I'd be sitting watching TV and me and my DP would be muttering at each other out of the sides of our mouths, not looking at her...

"She's staring at you again dear"
"I know"

Reason? She'd worked out that if she stared long enough, I'd assume she needed to go for a wee, and I'd let her outside. Of course, mostly she DIDN'T need a wee, but making me get up and let her out for a brief potter about was more interesting than lying down all evening.

Contrary to what pack theorists would probably say, she wasn't trying to dominate me, with a view to taking over the world. She was doing What Works, with the added bonus of making me move about - being mostly Border Collie, making things move is the equivalent, to her, of a terrier digging and a Labrador liking water.

After a few nights of totally ignoring her, and only letting her out on MY schedule, she stopped. Because it stopped working. Not because she realised I Was Boss/In Charge.

Brilliant!

A variable rate of reward can be far more effective than a treat every time.

Think of yourself as a fruit machine. A fruit machine that paid out a pound every time you pulled the lever would be FAR less interesting and exciting to play than one that paid out, say, a tenner every so often and kept you guessing.

Greyhound owner here. We take ours to classes and our old boy made us proud when he got his Gold award, but I'd be stupid to the point of negligence (as would most sensible owners of pointies) if I expected him to display perfect recall when faced with a field full of rabbits. Ours come from a long line of dogs who are bred and trained to do one thing only and that is to chase things very very fast. Nothing to do with dominance at all. Fortunately we did our classes with a wonderful teacher who encouraged all class members to find the motivation that worked for their dog - whether that be praise, treats, or toys.

It's unfortunate that I still come across people who give behavioural advice via rescues that espouse outdated and potentially dangerous ideas about dominance and packs. We were told shortly after adopting ours that we should be doing the whole "eat before your dogs/don't let them go through the door before you". Initially I believed this rubbish. Fortunately, I quickly wised up and these days, for anyone who's interested there really is such a wealth of material available via books and websites on how dogs learn and how they interact, both with each other and with humans. Any dog owner who wants to find out more can, very easily. What's lovely is that this profoundly enriches what is already a very satisfying and rewarding relationship.

Jooly - I've only met a couple of Beagles but from what I hear, they're basically just a big wiffly nose on legs