Agree with this. The whole "dominance" thing is outmoded and desperately simplistic, propagated mainly these days by the likes of Cesar Milan and not by qualified dog behaviourists.
Dominance Hierarchy?
- Thread starter Jonesdhc
- Start date
Agree with this. The whole "dominance" thing is outmoded and desperately simplistic, propagated mainly these days by the likes of Cesar Milan and not by qualified dog behaviourists.
KarenCurtis
Forums Sage
It's not a taboo term, don't worry about it. You were just trying to explain a behavior as best you could, that is all. The advice here on what to do about it is good- terminology is not nearly as important as explaining the behavior so others can understand, which you did.
Caro
Moderator
Dont worry about it. It all gets a bit confusing with using dominance theories, I think thats why we try to avoid it.
I went to a talk recently and learnt this interesting nugget. In a pack (wolf and dog) food will often be shared out amongst the males according to their rank, but a female of any rank can always go up to any male and pinch his food without argument - even the oldest and most senior males. Its logical on a survival basis to keep your females well fed (and happy!) I know my female sheltie loves bossing Mr D over food.
I went to a talk recently and learnt this interesting nugget. In a pack (wolf and dog) food will often be shared out amongst the males according to their rank, but a female of any rank can always go up to any male and pinch his food without argument - even the oldest and most senior males. Its logical on a survival basis to keep your females well fed (and happy!) I know my female sheltie loves bossing Mr D over food.
No one's expressed any offence, that I'm aware of, nor tried to administer any tongue lashing. Sorry if it seemed that way. The point isn't about the terminology but the concepts it represents. I was merely trying to express that if you are coming at your problem from the angle of dominance in a hierarchical context as you imply in your OP then you'll be less likely to get to the root of the trouble.
You asked "is there a dominance hierarchy in multiple dog households" - in my opinion the answer is that if there is it doesn't work in the way people have previously assumed, which is based on old - and flawed - studies of wolves in captivity, as well as the erroneous notion that dogs are behaviourally identical to wolves.
There's lots of reading on this, but for starters you might find this to be of some interest.
Apologies for not having any actionable advice for you, but I'm still on a learning curve myself and as Caro mentions, it's kind of a thorny area. Good luck with sorting things out.
Caro
Moderator
There are a couple of good theorists you might want to look at.
Dr Ian Dunbar
http://www.dogstardaily.com/
If you drive or walk a lot download his podcasts - they are interesting and I am sure he covers dominance issues in several of them.
Dr Patricial McConnell
http://www.patriciamcconnell.com/
she has several booklets worth reading - including one about multiple dog households Feeling outnumbered and another How to be leader of the pack and have your dog love you for it
Dr Ian Dunbar
http://www.dogstardaily.com/
If you drive or walk a lot download his podcasts - they are interesting and I am sure he covers dominance issues in several of them.
Dr Patricial McConnell
http://www.patriciamcconnell.com/
she has several booklets worth reading - including one about multiple dog households Feeling outnumbered and another How to be leader of the pack and have your dog love you for it
Thank you, I'll certainly get my hands on a couple of these.
But I'm still failing to understand, if "dominance" is still mentioned in the very description of one of these resources, and is clearly a unifying thread in almost all theories, then why are the sparks flying over the mere mention of it in the forum? I don't quite see the reasoning behind the tenderness of the subject matter. I understand that there are many other crucial factors at play (as I think anyone who actually owns a dog would), but do we not all acknowledge the significance and prominence of these particular social patterns?
But I'm still failing to understand, if "dominance" is still mentioned in the very description of one of these resources, and is clearly a unifying thread in almost all theories, then why are the sparks flying over the mere mention of it in the forum? I don't quite see the reasoning behind the tenderness of the subject matter. I understand that there are many other crucial factors at play (as I think anyone who actually owns a dog would), but do we not all acknowledge the significance and prominence of these particular social patterns?
I think you're being a big over-sensitive if you think any sparks have flown.
I admit my first post might have seemed...curt. I probably didn't put the effort into it I could have.The link I gave you answers some of these questions. I think the point is that wolves don't dominate each other in the way that we had previously thought - packs tend to be family units and the "alphas" are actually the breeding pair - the parents. Their hierarchy is not based on physical dominance.
Furthermore, dogs are different from wolves. Studies consistently show that they behave and think differently. Studies of free roaming dogs indicate that "pack leadership" is a fluid thing, often changing, and is not based on aggression, but on other characteristics such as experience. The kind of aggression you're describing in your dogs is I suspect probably more of situational thing related to context and learned behaviours, rather than vying for position in a pack hierarchy.
Check out the link I posted above, as well as this one.