The language of dominance and submission

I don't know if it is controlling resources, so much as it is having them work for  resources.

Should we consider the farmers as our leaders since they control the resources, should cheffs be the prime ministers of the country?
 
It is not natural to have a nervous leader with not confidence at all only because that leader provides the food, non confident owners wont guide a succesful pack in the dogs eyes, it does not matter if the owner is rich or have a food industry business, for the dog you are what you project not what you have

Well, I've found that nonconfident leaders tend to not do a good job of performing the actions that demonstrate leadership. But just "feeling" underconfident I think is too wishy-washy of a condition to be able to infer a causal relationship. And which is why I find Cesar Millan's teachings to be way too new-age and nonspecific, becuase he talks about "attitudes" and "zones" a lot, but not so much about specific step-by-step actions that would demonstrate that.

Controlling resources is just that. My dogs have desires: food, going outside, going for a walk, getting affection, getting to lay in a choice spot, chewing a bone. And all of those things are absolutely in my control and contingent upon me dispensing them from my own hand. JM is right, it is implicit in "controlling" the resources that you actually do exert a level of control and not just dispense them willy-nilly. Something is required of them before I relinquish control of a certain resource. Sitting until released at doorways to the outside. Laying down until released for meals. Crating up and laying down for a Kong. Keeping a loose leash for a walk. Waiting until invited for a choice napping spot. This is all contingent on my understanding of dogs as selfish, opportunistic beings that do what works to get what they want. Since we control what they want, we can shape their definition of "what works" to be in line with how we would want a dog to behave.

Controlling resources is just that. My dogs have desires: food, going outside, going for a walk, getting affection, getting to lay in a choice spot, chewing a bone.

Yup. Being a leader means you have everyone's attention any time you want it. That doesn't mean they stare at you all the time or even think about you all the time. But it you have the resources, it's a survival thing to keep a half an eye on you.

Should we consider the farmers as our leaders since they control the resources, should cheffs be the prime ministers of the country?

Farmers don't control all the resources, but let's talk about this in this context. Considering the above, that a leader can command your attention at will - think of what would happen if every farmer in the world joined together and said, "No more food until you all behave yourselves!" I bet it would make a few newscasts, at the very least. . . .

ORIGINAL: houndlove

Well, I've found that nonconfident leaders tend to not do a good job of performing the actions that demonstrate leadership. But just "feeling" underconfident I think is too wishy-washy of a condition to be able to infer a causal relationship. And which is why I find Cesar Millan's teachings to be way too new-age and nonspecific, becuase he talks about "attitudes" and "zones" a lot, but not so much about specific step-by-step actions that would demonstrate that.

Controlling resources is just that. My dogs have desires: food, going outside, going for a walk, getting affection, getting to lay in a choice spot, chewing a bone. And all of those things are absolutely in my control and contingent upon me dispensing them from my own hand. JM is right, it is implicit in "controlling" the resources that you actually do exert a level of control and not just dispense them willy-nilly. Something is required of them before I relinquish control of a certain resource. Sitting until released at doorways to the outside. Laying down until released for meals. Crating up and laying down for a Kong. Keeping a loose leash for a walk. Waiting until invited for a choice napping spot. This is all contingent on my understanding of dogs as selfish, opportunistic beings that do what works to get what they want. Since we control what they want, we can shape their definition of "what works" to be in line with how we would want a dog to behave.

 
You are being a leader there, you make him work for what you want him to do, which is different that just provide, if your understanding of controlling resurces is making him work for what he wants and use NILIF then we both are right, but if a person just lives for feeding the dog and open the door to go out without applying leadership at the same time then that control resourcing means nothing for the dog, you are just a lower rank member with opposible thumbs, dogs communicate thru the feelings they have, i dont need to touch a dog to make him realize that i dont want him to be in my bed, not because humans lack of that way to communicate that means it does not exist
 
You cant fool a dog that way, you can come and give him the best steak you found in the market but if you do it in a fearful way (because he is aggressive for example) the dog wont change the way it feels about you just because you brought food, for the dog you are still a weak member of the pack that cant be trusted to have a leadership roll, dogs dont follow emotional unstable leaders

I am beginning to question the "energy" (feeling)  thing myself.

I was in the middle of a panic attack over that monster of a rot yesterday.

Zeus didn't blink an eye.

So...if the energy thing was true, my mental  melt down  should have caused Zeus to go into a frenzy.

I did do the required actions though.  Focused on breathing and keeping the lead loose.

ORIGINAL: houndlove

Well, I've found that nonconfident leaders tend to not do a good job of performing the actions that demonstrate leadership. But just "feeling" underconfident I think is too wishy-washy of a condition to be able to infer a causal relationship. And which is why I find Cesar Millan's teachings to be way too new-age and nonspecific, becuase he talks about "attitudes" and "zones" a lot, but not so much about specific step-by-step actions that would demonstrate that.
.

ORIGINAL: JM

I am beginning to question the "energy" (feeling)  thing myself.

I was in the middle of a panic attack over that monster of a rot yesterday.

Zeus didn't blink an eye.

So...if the energy thing was true, my mental  melt down  should have caused Zeus to go into a frenzy.

I did do the required actions though.  Focused on breathing and keeping the lead loose.

A lot of the owners Cesar works with are exactly where you are and he does tell people to relax and breath, not tighten up on the leash. He also encourages people to think of something which brings them into a more confident or pleasant frame of mind to loosen up their tense body language and stand up straight without feeling they have to keep focusing on the dog or the object of the dog's insecurity or aggression.

At first it starts out kind of like "fake it 'till you make it". As your confidence grows through successes, it will be more than just the breathing and a loose lead. But, this is a good start.

If I suddenly display tense body language, the dog doesn't associate my tenseness is due to something *they* might do, they associate my tenseness with the object that just entered the picture. My tenseness can communicate I'm insecure about the object (or dog, or person) or I'm preparing for battle.

If you're seen as the dog's leader, they will take their cue from you. If you're not seen as the dog's leader, you have still communicated a warning by a pack member, and the dog will make their own decisions regarding the object (or dog, or person). IMOAE

ETA: Once the dog makes a decision and escalates, you are put into the position of simply reacting to what the dog is doing, as a follower would. Action and reaction.

LIFR (Leaders Initiate Followers React) I believe is a term Myrna M. Milani uses. Haven't read it myself, I don't have that particular book of hers. A trainer friend mentioned it to me after I mentioned the action/reaction sequence in a conversation.

ORIGINAL: JM

I am beginning to question the "energy" (feeling)  thing myself.

I was in the middle of a panic attack over that monster of a rot yesterday.

Zeus didn't blink an eye.

So...if the energy thing was true, my mental  melt down  should have caused Zeus to go into a frenzy.

I did do the required actions though.  Focused on breathing and keeping the lead loose.

I'm sure your dog noticed the panick attack, if he is fearful he would be reacted the same way, if he is aggressive he would be reacted that way, why were you in a panick attack? was because you knew your dog would react if he sees the other dog too? or just because you are afraid of them period?

I was watching Zeus pretty closely.  I saw no signs of nervousness before or after.

I was in a panic attack because he is about 100 pounds and we were close enough to be killed if he could get to us. 

The owner has a tendency to leave the gate open and the dog comes and goes.

 Evidently the gate was locked that day, because we survived.

It charged me and the pom one day while out walking. There was enough distance between us for me to scoop the pom up and disappear down a hill.

I also reported the owner to the dog warden about a week or so before.  Maybe that is why the dog's gate was locked.

ORIGINAL: espencer

ORIGINAL: corvus

I totally agree that bringing home the food should be enough on it's own in most cases to ensure an alpha position in a doggy/human household.

If thats true then this forum would be reduce to only half of the problems without dogs that nip to their owners, resource guard, etc. and NILIF would not exist

Dogs dont follow shy leaders, fearful leaders, unconfident leaders, etc and it does not matter if they bring a prime rib steak every day for dinner, they just wont accept them

No, you've missed my point. WOLVES don't follow shy, fearful or uncertain leaders because such leaders don't exist. They don't exist because all those things come about through a lack of strength. Strength has to be the only thing that matters because it's a true signal of fitness. A weak wolf will not be confident in the alpha position because it knows it's not strong and it's just a matter of time before someone bigger who cares more comes along and kicks them out. I'm not willing to believe wolves can judge leadership skills in their fellow packmates at this time.

It's a circular argument, but I can tell you where it all starts and that's at strength and motivation. It always starts at strength and motivation because that's all that matters when it comes to serious aggression, which it inevitably will when there's a shift in leadership, territory holding, mating rights, or access to food, water or shelter.

Of course there are cases with difficult dogs, which is why I said most cases, not all cases. However, in a dog's mind, when you give them their meals when you want to give them their meals, and when you take them out when you want to, and when you pat them when you want to, that's a pretty clear signal to them that you're firmly at the top of the hierarchy. I think a lot of dogs automatically put humans on a level with gods. We can do awesome things they can't comprehend. When someone picks up an injured bird, our vallhund, Pyry, follows them around adoringly for the rest of the day, sometimes longer. []

NILIF is simply showing the dog that you control the food and all good things, which you do anyway. Plenty of good dog owners have been practising it long before it ever had a name. It's not something specifically invented to deal with dominant dogs, it just really helps dominant dogs realise where they stand.

Ron, yes, we've done the two female dogs of the same size thing. It was a disaster and almost ended in Penny getting killed. Never doing it again. However, I was talking in general terms, and about wolves rather than dogs. We all know wolf behaviour can help us understand dogs and I certainly wasn't suggesting that dogs have no carryover from wolf behaviour. I believe wars between residing bitches to be one of those carryovers. Having said that, though, I suspect it's a carryover that has been dulled over the generations due to having those wolfy selection pressures replaced with human selection pressures. I also suspect the pack instinct that prevents complete mayhem in wolf packs with more than one female has also been dulled, leaving us with a bit of a problem in certain types of dogs.

ORIGINAL: JM

So...if the energy thing was true, my mental  melt down  should have caused Zeus to go into a frenzy.

I did do the required actions though.  Focused on breathing and keeping the lead loose.

I believe it depends a lot on your dog's personality as well as the kind of relationship you have with your dog as to how the dog will respond to an emotional outburst from you. My dog is a herding breed, and she is most closely bonded to me. She relies heavily on me for direction, but she's generally calm and not usually reactive. I'm a very level-headed person and rarely have emotional outbursts. When I do, they frighten the hell out of my dog and she either fawns all over me in case I'm upset with her or she runs and lies on her bed to keep well out of it. To her, my so-called "energy" is obvious and very important to her in choosing what to do and how to behave.

I was thinking about it some more on our morning walk this AM and this is pretty far from any kind of a scientific analysis but I think what I see most in dog owners having problems is not a "leadership style" or "attitude" problem but simply that the dog owner has not made the connection that rewards increase the likelihood of a behavior being repeated and not giving rewards increases the chances that it won't. That in conjunction with a lack of patience and a misunderstanding of the lack of complexity in dog thought processes I think is probably the biggest problem I see. People who have a begging dog and give the dog food for their begging just to shut them up. Lack of patience and rewarding bad behavior. People with a pulling dog who just let the dog pull. Lack of patience and rewarding bad behavior. I've also found that it has never occured to many dog owners to reward good behavior. These are very concrete things and demonstrate to the dog quite clearly what is expected of them (both what to do and what not to do) and who is in charge, and these very things are what I most find missing from the scene when people post (here and elsewhere) or talk to me about the problems they've having with their dog.

ORIGINAL: corvus

No, you've missed my point. WOLVES don't follow shy, fearful or uncertain leaders because such leaders don't exist. They don't exist because all those things come about through a lack of strength. Strength has to be the only thing that matters because it's a true signal of fitness. A weak wolf will not be confident in the alpha position because it knows it's not strong and it's just a matter of time before someone bigger who cares more comes along and kicks them out. I'm not willing to believe wolves can judge leadership skills in their fellow packmates at this time.

 
Exactly, such leaders dont exist, why should we think then that an owner with those feelings would be consider a leader, strength helps but it does not matter if the pack member is a bear-sized animal, if he is not confident enough then he has high chances not to be the leader, i bet you have seen small dogs being the ones that act more confident and are seen as leaders between a pack including big dogs

"Reward" is also subject to interpretation.
 
There is the instant gratification (reward) of a treat or a toy, which is helpful in "training". Treats and toys increase excitement and drive, which may not be helpful in dealing with an out of control, aggressive, or excitable dog in social situations.
 
There is also the reward of stability, security, and fulfillment through a dog knowing their place within their social group, knowing who the leader is, and living with someone who sees to it they get their needs for physical exercise and mental challenge met.
 
The ultimate reward for a dog (IMO) is stability, security, and living with a human who understands and communicates with them what is expected and what is and is not appropriate social behavior.
 
This helps create a healthy, happy, balanced, fulfilled, and stable dog who is a safe member of society and is welcomed anywhere.
 
Appropriate social behavior is taught by someone the dog sees as their leader. Subordinants learn appropriate social behavior from the dominant (leaders) animals within the group.
 
The ultimate punishment is being put to death because the leader failed to provide this guidence and the dog became unstable.
 
Being a leader is also understanding the signals we are sending which indicates we are subordinant to the dog or flip-flop between sending dominant signals one minute and submissive signals the next.
 
Ignoring a dog when you first meet them is helpful. But most people do not do this. They approach the strange dog head-on making high-pitched whimpering noises, they reach for the dog, shove cookies towards it, they stare at the dog, they tower over the dog or lower themselves, they grin and show their teeth...this little scenario right here can send confusing messages to the dog that we are dominant, submissive, or unstable.
 
We could break the entire paragraph I just wrote down into all of the components and discuss our different viewpoints.
 
This one very confusing (to a dog) interaction only takes a few seconds, but will affect how the dog "sees" you and how comfortable or uncomfortable the dog will feel in your presence. It can also indicate whether or not you are leadership material.
 
Dogs also watch how another dog interacts with you to see if you are a leader or a follower. A dog walking out in front of their owner displaying dominant body language and issueing challenges is more likely (no absolutes) to be attacked by another dog than one who is following their owner dispaying submissive signals.
 
 
 
 

I am wondering if structure is not an important (and crucial)  part in balancing  a dog.  That way they know what to expect and when.

I am really thinking that this has calmed mine down.

No more willy nilly and anything goes.  Everything is on a time schedule.

Not an exact time schedule.  But mornings means walks, mid morning is quiet/nap time.

Afternoon is outside time...etc etc.

I have become a firm believer that over stimulation creates most behavior problems.... and scheduled quiet times is a must.


I am just not getting the submissive signals that we send to our dogs.

I need these broke down into specific behaviors.