ALPHA (word discussion)

I'm entertaining the idea that social hierarchies are not nearly as fluid as they seem. My feeling is that just because the top dog doesn't want the best bed right now doesn't mean he's bowing to another dog's social status. Maybe he doesn't think that one's the best bed. Maybe he doesn't think it's worth fighting over. Similarly, maybe out and about the top dog recognises that another dog is good at finding fun, so he follows that dog. Our top dog never does this, but he's really independent and believes that he's better at finding fun than we are. Doesn't mean he thinks he ranks higher than us, just that we're boring in the bush and for some reason aren't interested in following roo trails and eating roo poo. Jill is interested in those things, but she's much faster and she can keep up with the roos, so she does just that and Pyry trots along behind eating poo. However, Jill won't bust out of the yard on her own, it takes Pyry to go first before she'll jump the fence. She could do it any time she wanted, but she doesn't want to if he's not out first forging the way to fun.

Penny is at the bottom, but she doesn't like going off without the people. Instead, she barks to tell us the other dogs are gone. She frets when they're away, but she won't go with them.

My point in all of this is that I think dogs just like to do what is their idea of fun and rank doesn't really come into it. Pyry can have fun alone, but Jill can't. If Penny was still young enough to enjoy a romp around the bush after roos, I'm pretty sure Jill would bust out if she went on her own, and Pyry likely would, too. However, if Pyry wants to play a game with Jill all of a sudden, he barges in and makes her run, but if Jill wants to play with Penny, she play-bows and entices her into a game. So I think alpha does have use as a label for the top dog, but I prefer top dog. Alpha has connotations. It doesn't need to, but it does, so I avoid it unless I'm making fun of pack theory. I'm with mudpuppy and I think humans are exempt from dog social order.

I have a few questions for my own enlightenment's sake for those who don't like the word Alpha. I'd really appreciate some insight into your thinking on this.

What word(s) do you think would be more appropriate to describe what I mean by alpha?
Or do you think the position simply does not exist in the dog world?
Do you have a word or phrase that describes your relationship to your dogs?

If you don't use the word (or idea of) "dominance", and don't believe that humans can be grouped in the social order of the dog's world, what would you say about a dog who growls, snaps at or even bites the human when the human tries to make him get off the bed?

What's going on when a dog KNOWS what the human means, but doesn't do what they say?

Thank you!

I'd say that dog was being pushy and has probably been spoiled in the past and is perhaps a resource gaurder. I'd say to attach a drag leash to safely remove the dog from the bed should they get on it, close the bedroom door for a time, begin to hand feed and work on resource gaurding protocols.

My relationship with my dogs is one of partnership, though due to my much larger brain and handy opposable thumbs, I seem to be the senior partner and probably very much Like Unto a God to the dogs. I am the conduit through which tasty food and access to comfortable sleeping quarters come, as well as the provider of games, a playmate, a comfort during times of stress, a teacher, and a protector. I'm a rubber of ears and a scritcher of bellies. The dogs would be completely insane, given all that, to not reciprocate by following some simple rules (which I lay down by teaching, not dictating) that ensure their safety and happiness in a world that really is not their own (we live in a city, fairly new territory for the domestic dog in the evolutionary scheme of things).

The thing about "Alpha" is, like any word, you personally can define it any way you want for yourself, but the fact is that for the vast majority of people in implies the top of a hierarchical chain. It's the first letter of the alphabet--not the co-first-letter, not the sometimes-first-letter, not the letter that roams about and changes positions, but the first letter which all other letters follow in a sequential manner.

I'll have to read your posts carefully before I can answer #1, but...

Or do you think the position simply does not exist in the dog world?

I think it exists in dog world, as in, a pack of wild dogs or wolves, packs of stray/feral dogs.  Since domestic dogs and humans are both totally different from wild dogs and totally different from each other, I haven't found enough sound evidence to convince me that the concept of "alpha" is signficant in the context of me and my pets.


Do you have a word or phrase that describes your relationship to your dogs?

Yep, we're a "team".  With more than one, there's a special relationship with each one seperately.  Together, they may have their own dog pack according to their rules of being a dog, rules I'm not alway privy to, but as far as dog-human, I like being a team with each dog individually.

ORIGINAL: houndlove

 
The thing about "Alpha" is, like any word, you personally can define it any way you want for yourself, but the fact is that for the vast majority of people in implies the top of a hierarchical chain. It's the first letter of the alphabet--not the co-first-letter, not the sometimes-first-letter, not the letter that roams about and changes positions, but the first letter which all other letters follow in a sequential manner.

 
 and with the definition that you gave, I would be okay with stating myself as the alpha. I am at the top, I do not care which dog is 2nd or 3rd but I insist on being at the top, I do not change positions with my dogs so I would be the alpha according to the definition.
 
 
Four
 
  The situation that you describe with a dog growling to me would indicate dominance (assuming it is my dog and I know him well) he is telling me that he likes the bed and he does not want to leave and he is indicating that I should leave him be. I do not think every behaviour is an act of dominance (or rebellion) but in this case that is what I would call it. Other possibilties could include fear, or stress and that is determined by how well you know the dog and the circumstances by which he is growling.

ORIGINAL: houndlove
I seem to be the senior partner and probably very much Like Unto a God to the dogs. I am the conduit through which tasty food and access to comfortable sleeping quarters come, as well as the provider of games, a playmate, a comfort during times of stress, a teacher, and a protector.

Well-said! That, in fact is exactly what I mean by my position of alpha. I guess I just like to use much fewer words. (surprisingly!) [8D]

simple rules (which I lay down by teaching, not dictating)

Can you tell me what you see as the difference between teaching and dictating?

It's the first letter of the alphabet--not the co-first-letter, not the sometimes-first-letter, not the letter that roams about and changes positions, but the first letter which all other letters follow in a sequential manner.

Except for the "in a sequential manner" part of this statement, this is who I am. I am the first, not the co-first, not the sometimes-first, not changing positions. And all others follow. So, I feel pretty good using this word to describe my position here.

Because I have the larger brain and the opposable thumbs and all that, I am the big kahuna, the big cheese, the top dog, the boss. Alpha. It's just an easier way of saying it.

If you don't use the word (or idea of) "dominance", and don't believe that humans can be grouped in the social order of the dog's world, what would you say about a dog who growls, snaps at or even bites the human when the human tries to make him get off the bed?

Simple resource guarding.  Possession trumps dominance.  If I've got it I'm entitled to try to hang on to it, regardless of social status.

If you don't use the word (or idea of) "dominance", and don't believe that humans can be grouped in the social order of the dog's world, what would you say about a dog who growls, snaps at or even bites the human when the human tries to make him get off the bed?

 
this is just resource guarding. To dogs, possession trumps dominance. If a dog is in possession of a resource (nice soft bed) no dominant dog would attempt to forcibly evict the dog in possession-- very rude by dog rules-- and if he did attempt this rude behavior, the submissive dog would probably snarl, snap, and bite.
Dominance only comes into play with un-possessed items. If the bed is empty, the submissive dog will hesitate briefly to allow the dominant dog to claim the bed first if the dominant dog wants it.
 
If dogs don't obey human commands, either the dog is confused, distracted, or under-motivated. Nothing to do with dominance.
 
I don't think dominance plays any role in human-dog interactions. It does play a minor role in dog-dog interactions.

I think you make a good point... if one dog comes up and claims the resting place or toy or chew many ppl would assume he is "dominant".  So what you are saying is: he's just a bully and dominance does not come into it.  He might be an "alpha wannabe" but hes no "alpha".
 
Which brings me to my main beef with the word "alpha".  Its all too often a label stuck on the wrong dog.  On the dog who WANTS to be alpha, on the dog who is poorly trained or fearful..... just my [sm=2cents.gif]

Well, the difference between teaching and dictating is probably something that all of us as really involved dog owners do instinctively but I see a lot of people not quite getting. When you lay down a rule, you have to teach the dog (and this works the same way for students as well if you're an educator) what your expectations are, what he should do instead, and then give him lots of practice before you can expect the rule to be followed. I think too many people just lay a rule down, don't teach it, and then accuse the dog of being dominant when the rule is not followed--the old "He knows he's not supposed to that" thing.

If I had to sum up my position more succinctly, I'd say senior partner rather than alpha. Alpha just has too much baggage for me, it implies a dominance hiearchy that I don't feel I'm part of. I don't require submission from my dogs, I just require rules to be followed and requests complied with as long as they are reasonable requests.

Which brings me to my main beef with the word "alpha". Its all too often a label stuck on the wrong dog. On the dog who WANTS to be alpha, on the dog who is poorly trained or fearful..... just my

 
yeah. People seem to equate aggressive behavior= dominance when in fact it's quite the opposite.

ORIGINAL: houndlove



If I had to sum up my position more succinctly, I'd say senior partner rather than alpha. Alpha just has too much baggage for me, it implies a dominance hierarchy that I don't feel I'm part of. I don't require submission from my dogs, I just require rules to be followed and requests complied with as long as they are reasonable requests.

 
 We need to discuss the word submission and what it means to each of us: If you teach the dog what is expected (reasonable requests) and once you are certain the dog understands you, you then expect him to obey the rules, which in a sense is submission. You expect the dog to submit to your requests and to forgo that which he may desire. The dog on his own may just wish to lay on the bed and sleep, and you call him to come and he gets up off the bed and comes, has he not in a sense "submitted" as he has forgone that which he desired and heeded your wishes. We are walking, dog walks quietly at my side even though the birds and rabbits are frolicking and he noticed them and desires to chase them. He is submitting to my desire for him to forgo chasing in favor of walking quietly at my side.
 Submission does not necessarily mean groveling on ones belly, looking up and saying "please don't step on me".
 
 Also in many ways the relationship is a dictatorship (or monarchy). I work hard at understanding my dogs and in caring for them and keeping them safe and happy, but in the truest sense of the word it is a dictatorship (or monarchy) and not a partnership. They do not decide which food to buy, which toy, when we will go, where we will go, they may not wish to see the vet, but I insist that they do. So I suppose it boils down to what kind of dictator (ruler) you are. Do you rule with absolute and selfish authority or do you rule with benevolence and the intentions of obtaining what is best for your “subjects”.
 

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

Which brings me to my main beef with the word "alpha". Its all too often a label stuck on the wrong dog. On the dog who WANTS to be alpha, on the dog who is poorly trained or fearful..... just my

yeah. People seem to equate aggressive behavior= dominance when in fact it's quite the opposite.

 
 I believe it boils down to words again. If my dog is on my bed and I ask him to move, and he growls at me and refuses to move, this is unacceptable behavior. He is choosing to disobey a reasonable request and he is doing it in a rude manner. Call it resource guarding, call it dominance, call it a bad hair day, the issue is still the same. He is telling me that he does not respect me at that moment nor does he think I am in a position to ask him to vacate the bed.
 I would remove him from the bed, and place him on the floor in the down position (not on his back) and he would not be invited to the bed for some time. When he is invited on the bed or couch, he would be asked to leave often and until such time that he once again understood that it is by my benevolence that he is allowed on the couch or bed and requests to vacate are expected to be heeded without violence and without rudeness.
 

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

very rude by dog rules

And who teaches those rules to the dogs? how the dogs know is "rude" to take something away from them? were they born knowing that?

If you get a dog and start housebraking him, why is not "rude" in the "dogs world" to not let them pee inside the house? what is the difference?

I dont take things away from my dog for the sake of it or trying to "remind" her i'm "alpha", if i give something to my dog is very rare that i will take it back from her, there are situations where is needed (ie, gums start bleeding, etc.) so is a rule in my house that if i needed back (i repeat is very rare) i can take it

The alpha teaches those rules, every pack can have different rules, just like in Japan you need to take your shoes off before getting in to a house, just like you teach your dog not to pee inside the house, you can make a rule that you can take stuff away if its needed

The alpha set the rules, if in the dogs world the alpha does not give a penny if another dog has something in his mouth then thats their rule, but in the dogs world alphas dont give a penny where other members of the pack poop either, still you teach your dog not to do it inside the house and you make it a rule, whats the difference?

ORIGINAL: espencer

ORIGINAL: mudpuppy

very rude by dog rules

 but in the dogs world alphas dont give a penny where other members of the pack poop either, still you teach your dog not to do it inside the house and you make it a rule, whats the difference?

 
 espencer this has made my day! i am still laughing and it is actually a very good point