Dominance/Pack mentality

[DefiniteMaybe]

My dp was watching Cesar Milan on youtube last night and I just glanced over and said oh I've heard that his methods and thinking are out of date.
I don't really know anything about dogs or training dogs, but I'm sure I've read on here that the whole pack thing isn't right.
Dp got all huffy and insisted on watching 3 episodes in a row and then telling me I was wrong because his methods work.
I'm just wondering why they seem to work ie there was one where the dog was really aggressive with the other two dogs in the house, Cesar 'showed them their place' and then by the end all 3 dogs were best friends.
I thought he looked a bit of an idiot challenging the dog, but why did it work?

glad you've started this thread ..cos I'm confused as well

Have read some mnsnetters posting that the dominance thing is outdated and has been proven to be bollocks ?

I'd liek to know as picking up new dog on wednesday..

Well, clever editing for a start. But very broadly speaking his methods frighten dogs into obedience. They become scared of what is going to happen to them if they don't do what he wants - being yanked around, jabbed in the guts or pinned down. It might be effective in the short term to suppress undesirable behaviour but the dog is stressed.

Particularly when he works with aggressive dogs he also often intimidates them into a state of shut down. The behaviour (barking, growling etc) is stopped but the dog's underlying emotional state is not changed. Such a dog is stressed, unhappy and, in the worst cases, a ticking time bomb waiting to go off given the right set of conditions.

Also, that's just the theoretical side. There is also a moral element. I do not believe it is moral or justified to physically or mentally abuse a dog and can't understand why anyone would want to share their home with one if they think so little of them as to treat them that way.

drsophiayin.com/philosophy

drsophiayin.com/philosophy/betterway

drsophiayin.com/philosophy/dominance

thanks spicy pear ..will read those tonight

Thanks for that spicy pear, will have a look later.
I did say to dp that being aggressive to the dog is as bad as being aggressive to a child and is vile.

Very good post well explained SpicyPear.

I was thinking about the whole training thing this morning and I firmly believe that given enough time and the right inclination I could teach my dog absolutely anything with the aid of chicken treats - anything within her capabilities of course.

Cesar Milan's methods don't require chicken treats, just brute strength and aggression.

Of course you can teach a dog to obey you through fear, but why the hell would you want to and why would any decent person want a dog that is constantly fearful and therefore constantly on edge and potentially fear aggressive?

Frightening a dog might work in the short term but the trust in that relationship will be gone. Other problems will likely be created if the dog becomes fearful.

I'm no expert on this but know a lot of doggy people in dog rescue and every one of them thinks CM is a dick and his methods are yes morally wrong and potentially dangerous.

This link tells you all you need to know, as endorsed by the RSPCA, Dogs Trust, Wood Green, as well as the major UK dog behaviour and training organisations and several academic behaviour and ethology organisations:

www.dogwelfarecampaign.org/why-not-dominance.php

Very true that pigsDOfly, I have had my new dog who is a rescue for just over a week, she came with no recall whatsoever, I have never met a deafer dog, and already she will come flying to me on the park (when there isn't something more interesting to do, is only been a week ;) ) all down to a pocket full of chorizo, liver and hot dog :)

Whilst I would agree, from what I've read, about the dominance thing being disproven, I still struggle with the pack part..
What I mean is, dogs are pack animals, surely? They are born into one and love playing in one?
Please don't flame me, I really am just genuinely confused that dogs are apparently not pack animals.

Dogs are social animals but they do not live pack rules. They will occasionally live in loosely cooperative groups in the wild but their behaviour does not mimic that of wolves.

Coppinger studied feral dogs and is worth googling, and Mech (whose work pretty much led to the idea of dominance being applied to dogs) is on YouTube discussing it.

The concepts of dominance and pack behaviour are essentially one and the same. If you learn more about pack behaviour it becomes clear that domestic dogs do not exhibit it.

Oh, see I think of 'pack' as just another word for group- like humans, living in communities..
So when for eg, they say dogs like crates because it mimics the inherent den seeking as in the wild, you can see why I'm confused?!

Having read about it a few times...there's a fair amount of research showing that feral dogs don't in fact live in packs and that wolf packs aren't strictly speaking packs at all, but extended family groupings.

So 'Alpha' wolves aren't actually pack leaders, they're the parents of the other wolves, then there are adult children and actual children...and mixed in there there will be aunts, uncles and cousins, so it's not that there's a fixed status, just that adults are in charge and younger wolves do what they're told.

Feral dogs it seems left to their own devices have much smaller family groups and pretty much avoid other family groups.

I personally don't think there's any issue with thinking about a group of dogs as a pack and you as the leader...as long as you're thinking about it as a family and you're in a parental role not some mythical alpha wolf role. But obviously you pick your terminology carefully if you want other people to know what you mean.

Catbus dogs like crates because they are comfortable and enclosed and they get peace from passing toddlers/Hoovers/visiting MILs. ie dogs like crates because crates work for them :)

I don't think it's helpful to apply "in the wild" to dogs. Dogs are the most highly domesticated of all species, totally reliant on humans for their survival, and shaped by our breeding choices for thousands of years.

It is important to remember that they are animals and therefore they have different needs and comprehension of the world from us. It is also helpful to realise different breeds have sometimes got marked breed traits which impact their needs and behaviour. But "in the wild" is a very far removed situation from our pets.

I am reading this with interest.

I always believed the pack thing to be true, it made sense to me.

I am willing to re-think now.

Caeser Milan's methods are dreadful but they are popular. They feed into 'our' need to be in control of an otherwise 'dangerous beast' IYSWIM.

Barbra Woodhouse was hugely, amazingly popular back in the day. She reached near mega stardom by shouting at dogs and half choking them into submission.

I am impressed by the new, kinder methods of dog training. They make sense to me as someone who works in child development. They follow the same sort of rules (only they use more sausages

The thing about pack/dominance though...

Why does keeping some dogs off the furniture/bed help with snappy, aggressive behaviour?

I know it does. I have seen it work. I have had dogs that could sleep on your bed and be the model of good behaviour but others that really need to know their place in what would have been called the 'pack order'.

But if there is no pack order, why does it work?

Genuine question. I am really interested.

I don't know, I think 'in the wild' can be a bit useful if you're trying to sort out why dominance theory is flawed once you realise what in the wild actually means.

I don't mind thinking about myself being the dog's mother...sort of, lol. I mean I don't let my children just do whatever they want either, but, I don't need to assert dominance over them either.

Though I suspect the children would stage a coup if they could, I'm pretty sure the dog wouldn't join in though.

OP go on Youtube and search for 'Showdown with Holly'. Holly is a food aggressive lab, Cesar gives her food, then takes it away, when she snarls at him he punches her in the throat. The poor dog is throwing out stress signals left, right and centre but he ignores every single one and ends up being bitten :o

"Why does keeping some dogs off the furniture/bed help with snappy, aggressive behaviour?"

They're resources, the same as treats and food...I have control of all the nice stuff, so it makes sense to do what I want.

Some dogs are chancers though and will try and do what they want still, stopping free access to the resources makes them more likely to do what you want because doing what they want isn't getting them the resources.

Add into that that you're stopping the flash points where they might try and guard the sofa or bed and that every time you're training them off or whatever it reinforces that they get rewards for doing what you want and it all helps a bit.

Devere in answer to your point about keeping dogs off furniture leading to less snappy aggressive behaviour, I accept that this is the case with some dogs but it's nothing to do with showing them you are the alpha. I would suggest it has much more to do with avoiding confrontation and situations that make the dog stressed.

Some dogs are temperamentally more inclined to guard sleeping and resting spaces, and are therefore reactive when those are threatened. If your dog is this way inclined, by stopping them going on furniture and limiting their sleeping spots to dog beds that don't need to be shared with humans, you are avoiding the occurrence of a situation that makes the dog uncomfortable (sharing/being asked to move) and the attendant behaviour (growling/snapping).

Yes and also tabulah's point. x-post.

That makes sense in that it avoids the flash points.
But it also seems to help more generally.
Although maybe not as much as I previously thought.

Devere, an important concept in dog behaviour is that of rehearsal. The more frequently a dog exhibits a behaviour (whether it's a desirable one or not) the more likely a dog is to do it again. Preventing rehearsal is the first step in any behaviour modification plan. By preventing dogs having access to resources they may guard, guarding behaviour cannot be rehearsed and so it slowly dies out, being replaced by an alternative such as lying in their own bed, which is more rewarding (if your owner throws a chunk of chorizo every time you do it, anyway ).

I tend to think that would be due to stress stacking though:

If you reduce flash points the dog will be generally more able to maintain self control.

Oh yes and rehearsal, good point "affafan"