Are We Too Wrapped Up in Being Alpha?

Wow, well somebody better tell those folks that!  LOL.
 
Amazing that they can figure out where they are going never mind race like that!!
 
The race I was at this winter was awesome.  There was one team in particular that was all Siberian. The Alpha dog, was beautiful and large.  But he was the sweetest dog.  I was trying to get my little gal to calm while I was patting him.  I talked to the Alpha and he seemed to understand...So, he lay down and making himself smaller so she would come to him.  It didn't work, but it was so darn cute. 
 
When we hear the term Alpha it is kind of confused with being the aggressive, the dominant at all costs kind of a dog.  But it really isn't.  They set the pace and they keep order.  Others follow him/her.  But it is a dog or animal term!!!!
 
The human is a leader or a master. 

"The alpha wolves are not necessarily "in charge" or "leaders of the pack". They may decide where and when to hunt or they may not. An alpha wolf is not a leader so much as a wolf who has the right to do whatever it wants, whenever it wants. Since they have so much social freedom to do what they like, alpha wolves often have more opportunity than lower-ranking wolves to start hunting or to choose a resting place. The rest of the pack will then often follow and join in. "
 
Above quote taken from this cool site:
[linkhttp://www.wolfpark.org/wolffaq.html#livetogether]http://www.wolfpark.org/wolffaq.html#livetogether[/link]

Ok, here is me playing my wolf-pack melody again. Just throw eggs at me if you get sick, will you...
Now, it's possible in a pack of wolves to have multiple breeding pairs if resources in an environment permit. Otherwise, an A-wolf in that pack would fight to prevent mating... In some territories it's known for wolves to regularly live in big colonies with multiple breeding pairs. There you will have a dynamic that resembles our home.
On the other hand, from what I read about feral dogs, a higher ranking dog would not prevent subordinates from mating with "his" female (first come, first serve []), it wouldn't fight other members in a pack when attempting to mate. Also, just like human families, canine packs are all different: some like fight more than others, some are more active than others; you might have a group that is very laid back, one that is led by a softy - led, nevertheless. Even with cats, when there is a litter, hierarchal behaviors are evident until kittens get older and naturally "disperse" (even when continuing to live in the same apartment). Genetically they don't establish firm dominance hierarchies, and so when you have two fighting cats in a household, they will fight and fight and fight and fight. The purpose of hierarchies is nature is to have order and peace... it's not for an animal A to get the best resting spot and eat the best chunk of meat, that just comes with a package.

ORIGINAL: TinaK

The purpose of hierarchies is nature is to have order and peace... it's not for an animal A to get the best resting spot and eat the best chunk of meat, that just comes with a package.

 
Excellent point. []
 
 

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

.......Nor have I ever observed dogs exhibiting some kind of desire for "leaders" except in group hunting situations.  Once watched a random group of dogs (assorted households happening to meet at an off leash dog park) suddenly and spontaneously form into an incredibly complex and cooperative hunting pack when some really stupid deer wandering into the area.

Yes, dogs do need human "leaders" because they don't naturally understand how to behave in human society. But that has nothing to do with dog packs or alphas or dominance or any kind of natural dog behavior.

I think that dogs that live with humans do benefit greatly if the human is the leader, but as this thread has amply shown, people have vastly different ideas of what constitutes leadership. One of the places where the effect of leadership is most obvious to me is when working dogs on livestock. A beginner will enter an arena with a dog and a few sheep and utter chaos will ensue. That beginner may attempt to do all the "leadership" behaviors in the world, making the dog lie down before going through the gate, allowing the handler to go first, issuing commands in a low growly voice, the whole nine yards, but it's just chaos. So, an experienced handler will come into the arena and suddenly the dog is attentive and responsive. He may not be doing a perfect job of handling the stock, and he may not be obeying every command, but he is paying attention to the experienced handler. Interestingly, the sheep will also instantly gravitate to the experienced person and away from the inexperienced person. I would be hard pressed to describe anything specific that the experience handler has done to establish leadership. But the dog and the sheep instantly recognize that the beginner is terrified of the sheep and of what the dog will do to the sheep, and in the absence of leadership from a novice handler the dog will take charge. Since the dog is also inexperienced and doesn't really yet understand what to do, things look like a real mess, and people misinterpret this as the dog being dominant and trying to kill the stock and all sorts of misunderstanings. But, I don't see this so much as the dog taking advantage of the opportunity to be dominant or alpha, as that the dog is desperate for somebody to be in charge and it clearly ain't the person. The instant someone with some confidence and assurance steps into the picture the dog relinquishes his attempts at control, and is generally darned grateful that someone has relieved him of the responsibility.

I think the same sort of thing occurs in normal life with dogs interacting with humans. I don't know anything about wolf behavior or feral dog behavior, and the more I read about it the less I know. But I agree with Mudpuppy that dogs need, or at least greatly benefit from, human leaders when they live in human society. It's just that we confuse the accoutrements of leadership with actual leadership. I have a friend that always refers to herself as her dog's "mommy", who obsesses about the meaning of every flick of an ear that her dogs make, who is rushing her dogs off to the vet for every stubbed toe, who never leaves her dogs alone for more than 15 minutes, who arranges her entire life around feeding her dogs at the exact same time of day.... She also insists that her dogs wait for her at door ways, doesn't allow them on the furniture, eats before they do, issues commands in this absolutely ridiculous sounding growling voice, blah, blah, blah. And it is absolutely clear within two minutes of watching her interact with her dogs that she is not their leader. Her life revolves around them, not vice versa. Her dogs are well behaved enough really, but anytime she lets them off leash or tries to engage in any sort of activity like agility or obedience with them, they completely blow her off. It's sad really, because she wants to engage in these dog activities, but she can't bring herself to BE a leader, no matter how much she may try to act like one. They simply don't respect her and all the attempts in the world to mimic leadership with supposed pack behavior models won't change that. I think leadership is a state of mind, not a set of behaviors, and dogs are experts at picking out and responding to that state of mind.

... That beginner may attempt to do all the "leadership" behaviors in the world, making the dog lie down before going through the gate, allowing the handler to go first, issuing commands in a low growly voice, the whole nine yards, but it's just chaos. So, an experienced handler will come into the arena and suddenly the dog is attentive and responsive. He may not be doing a perfect job of handling the stock, and he may not be obeying every command, but he is paying attention to the experienced handler ...

True! It's not in these little separate acts perceived to make up for your leadership. It's in your state of mind, it's continuous...

I don't see this so much as the dog taking advantage of the opportunity to be dominant or alpha, as that the dog is desperate for somebody to be in charge and it clearly ain't the person. The instant someone with some confidence and assurance steps into the picture the dog relinquishes his attempts at control, and is generally darned grateful that someone has relieved him of the responsibility.

This may be the bingo statement of the thread. []  I think, however, that control doesn't have to mean "human tries to act like alpha" in the sense that it has been quantified by the Koehlers of the world.  I think that it's fine for it to simply mean that the "human is going to protect and direct".    I think that if the word "alpha" disappeared, we would still have handlers that exhibit great leadership, but maybe we would also have fewer newbies thinking they have to dominate their dogs by growling, shaking, scruffing, or popping.   That stuff is a poor substitute for the natural leadership quality that truly great handlers have.  [sm=2cents.gif]

I think that dogs that live with humans do benefit greatly if the human is the leader, but as this thread has amply shown, people have vastly different ideas of what constitutes leadership. One of the places where the effect of leadership is most obvious to me is when working dogs on livestock. A beginner will enter an arena with a dog and a few sheep and utter chaos will ensue. That beginner may attempt to do all the "leadership" behaviors in the world, making the dog lie down before going through the gate, allowing the handler to go first, issuing commands in a low growly voice, the whole nine yards, but it's just chaos. So, an experienced handler will come into the arena and suddenly the dog is attentive and responsive. He may not be doing a perfect job of handling the stock, and he may not be obeying every command, but he is paying attention to the experienced handler. Interestingly, the sheep will also instantly gravitate to the experienced person and away from the inexperienced person. I would be hard pressed to describe anything specific that the experience handler has done to establish leadership. But the dog and the sheep instantly recognize that the beginner is terrified of the sheep and of what the dog will do to the sheep, and in the absence of leadership from a novice handler the dog will take charge. Since the dog is also inexperienced and doesn't really yet understand what to do, things look like a real mess, and people misinterpret this as the dog being dominant and trying to kill the stock and all sorts of misunderstanings. But, I don't see this so much as the dog taking advantage of the opportunity to be dominant or alpha, as that the dog is desperate for somebody to be in charge and it clearly ain't the person. The instant someone with some confidence and assurance steps into the picture the dog relinquishes his attempts at control, and is generally darned grateful that someone has relieved him of the responsibility.

I think the same sort of thing occurs in normal life with dogs interacting with humans. I don't know anything about wolf behavior or feral dog behavior, and the more I read about it the less I know. But I agree with Mudpuppy that dogs need, or at least greatly benefit from, human leaders when they live in human society. It's just that we confuse the accoutrements of leadership with actual leadership. I have a friend that always refers to herself as her dog's "mommy", who obsesses about the meaning of every flick of an ear that her dogs make, who is rushing her dogs off to the vet for every stubbed toe, who never leaves her dogs alone for more than 15 minutes, who arranges her entire life around feeding her dogs at the exact same time of day.... She also insists that her dogs wait for her at door ways, doesn't allow them on the furniture, eats before they do, issues commands in this absolutely ridiculous sounding growling voice, blah, blah, blah. And it is absolutely clear within two minutes of watching her interact with her dogs that she is not their leader. Her life revolves around them, not vice versa. Her dogs are well behaved enough really, but anytime she lets them off leash or tries to engage in any sort of activity like agility or obedience with them, they completely blow her off. It's sad really, because she wants to engage in these dog activities, but she can't bring herself to BE a leader, no matter how much she may try to act like one. They simply don't respect her and all the attempts in the world to mimic leadership with supposed pack behavior models won't change that. I think leadership is a state of mind, not a set of behaviors, and dogs are experts at picking out and responding to that state of mind.

 
[sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif]
 
Might as well close this one now - Nuff said IMO.

In my view, the dog is your offspring. You breathed life into this dog, making him who he is to this day.  You are his God, and the universe revolves around you, the feeder, waterer, protector, advocate, trainer, and discipliner (not a realy word, but o well). If everytime you screwed up and wouldn't lie down to go to bed and your God shook your head really hard and slapped you, wouldn't you start to lose faith? Wouldn't you shut down, and break into pieces? I've seen too many dogs, IMO, shut down because owners decide not to listen to me or my mother in training, and take matters into their own classes.

 Here we are, in a positive reinforcement class, heeling around the ring, when some short fat lady stops and **attempts** pick up her dobe and throw her to the ground. I walked ever to her and asked what she was doing.

H"Ummm, Liz? Why are you trying to pick up Harley?"
L:"Because, dear, you of all people know what happens when a dog breaks a heel to snap at another dog"
H:"You pick him up?"
L, chuckling:"Oh, honey...I wish I was still so young and naive...you HAVE to be alpha with dobes....yaddah yaddah"

Well...did that defeat the purpose of the FIRST lesson in class, about how we are NOT alphas, we are leaders and advocates, and will not, could not, should not, do anything in the slightest way to harm our dogs, mentally, emotionally and pysically?

And I hate it when Joy will be in PetSmart with me because I want the opportunity to train her. Not that it's not fun, but when another dog come's around, I might release her to say hi with the owners permission. Joy rolls on her back, or turns away, or licks their lips.. Then they usually start telling me to praise her for submissive behavior. Ummm, is this really your choice? It depends on the dog, really. Sometimes if the dog is nervous, she'll give calming signals and calm down herself. Overly boisterous="submission poses". Big dogs=playful. Big, anxious, nervuos, "agressive' dogs= Joy being "dominant", leaning forward on her toes, tail tucked, ears airplaned and screaming like I'm stabbing her with pins. Wow, I never knew fear was being dominant[8|]

"but she can't bring herself to BE a leader, no matter how much she may try to act like one. They simply don't respect her and all the attempts in the world to mimic leadership with supposed pack behavior models won't change that. I think leadership is a state of mind, not a set of behaviors, and dogs are experts at picking out and responding to that state of mind. "
 
humans too instinctively identify and respond to "true" leaders. If you go out there and lead, they will follow.  You can't force anyone or anydog to think of you as a leader by engaging in petty acts of bullying. You can force them to obey you, but you can't force them to respect you.

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

I think that dogs that live with humans do benefit greatly if the human is the leader, but as this thread has amply shown, people have vastly different ideas of what constitutes leadership. One of the places where the effect of leadership is most obvious to me is when working dogs on livestock. A beginner will enter an arena with a dog and a few sheep and utter chaos will ensue. That beginner may attempt to do all the "leadership" behaviors in the world, making the dog lie down before going through the gate, allowing the handler to go first, issuing commands in a low growly voice, the whole nine yards, but it's just chaos. So, an experienced handler will come into the arena and suddenly the dog is attentive and responsive. He may not be doing a perfect job of handling the stock, and he may not be obeying every command, but he is paying attention to the experienced handler. Interestingly, the sheep will also instantly gravitate to the experienced person and away from the inexperienced person. I would be hard pressed to describe anything specific that the experience handler has done to establish leadership. But the dog and the sheep instantly recognize that the beginner is terrified of the sheep and of what the dog will do to the sheep, and in the absence of leadership from a novice handler the dog will take charge. Since the dog is also inexperienced and doesn't really yet understand what to do, things look like a real mess, and people misinterpret this as the dog being dominant and trying to kill the stock and all sorts of misunderstanings. But, I don't see this so much as the dog taking advantage of the opportunity to be dominant or alpha, as that the dog is desperate for somebody to be in charge and it clearly ain't the person. The instant someone with some confidence and assurance steps into the picture the dog relinquishes his attempts at control, and is generally darned grateful that someone has relieved him of the responsibility.

I think the same sort of thing occurs in normal life with dogs interacting with humans. I don't know anything about wolf behavior or feral dog behavior, and the more I read about it the less I know. But I agree with Mudpuppy that dogs need, or at least greatly benefit from, human leaders when they live in human society. It's just that we confuse the accoutrements of leadership with actual leadership. I have a friend that always refers to herself as her dog's "mommy", who obsesses about the meaning of every flick of an ear that her dogs make, who is rushing her dogs off to the vet for every stubbed toe, who never leaves her dogs alone for more than 15 minutes, who arranges her entire life around feeding her dogs at the exact same time of day.... She also insists that her dogs wait for her at door ways, doesn't allow them on the furniture, eats before they do, issues commands in this absolutely ridiculous sounding growling voice, blah, blah, blah. And it is absolutely clear within two minutes of watching her interact with her dogs that she is not their leader. Her life revolves around them, not vice versa. Her dogs are well behaved enough really, but anytime she lets them off leash or tries to engage in any sort of activity like agility or obedience with them, they completely blow her off. It's sad really, because she wants to engage in these dog activities, but she can't bring herself to BE a leader, no matter how much she may try to act like one. They simply don't respect her and all the attempts in the world to mimic leadership with supposed pack behavior models won't change that. I think leadership is a state of mind, not a set of behaviors, and dogs are experts at picking out and responding to that state of mind.

[sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif][sm=clapping%20hands%20smiley.gif]

Might as well close this one now - Nuff said IMO.

I agree with everything you said there! I would only add that leading is not only beneficial, it's necessary in any social group... otherwise, as you pointed out, there is a possibility of a chaos. It really depends on desires of the group members; if all they want to do is eat grass and cuddle, the role of a leader is not as evident as when you have action and conflicts that are reliant on resolution. It's like with married couples that only fight when there are money troubles; when everyone is fed with a few bucks to spare - everyone is happy kissy. []

ORIGINAL: buster the show dog
I would be hard pressed to describe anything specific that the experience handler has done to establish leadership.

As are we all. And some of our attempts to articulate these subtleties are compelling simply for their sisyphean effort.

ORIGINAL: buster the show dog
the more I read about it the less I know.

Kind wisdom. Thanks []

WOW!

I never have seemed to have a problem with my dogs knowing who was who. I have had dogs that were little power hungry mongers with no real power. I have had alphlas that throw thier weight around, I have had dogs that could careless about rank ( I have to say this is the majority).
i have had calm leaders who could syop another dog with a stare. I have let all my dogs run through the house, nip me, jump on me, snatch food off the table, jump on the counters.
I have yet to have a dog try to challenge my authority. I have yet to have  a dog try stare at me and challenge me to a fight. I do think thier are social implications to learning, but I think they are hardly enough to base an entire training program off of.

No, I don't mind.  []
 
Belated, I know. Haven't been around much, busy with puppies and work!

But interesting thread everyone! Good to see we can keep it semi-diplomatic and mature! I'm enjoying reading what everyone has to say on the topic!