Pack Rules

mudpuppy

I have never seen how CM does it but my method may be similar.  Basically I establish a bond with the new dog.  I lead the dog into my backyard and the dog is given an opportunity to get a feel of the layout of the yard, you know hiding places.  The dog also smells the other dogs and also hears the other dogs in the house.  I introduce the pack in tiers with the longest residence first and then fosters, depending on how long they have been with me. 

I'm curious DPU and others who foster many dogs; do you really think the dogs consider themselves a "pack"? or do they perhaps think they just live in some kind of extended doggy daycare situation, a bunch of dogs trying to get along? Consider when people bring dogs to the dog park- these dogs don't know each other, and yet you almost never see any kind of truly aggressive behaviors. I liken it to people- you have your family, and your family can certainly go to social events and interact with others for extended periods with few if any expressions of violence.

I think the only way you could really test if your dogs are a pack or not would be to set them lose to fend for themselves for a few weeks, and see who stays with who. The experiment of course is untenable.

Now we are at the root of why dogs form social groups, but not really "packs" in the wolf pack sense.  Dog lovers have certainly colloquialized the word to mean family group, and some extend the meaning to refer to behavior within the group.  However, wolves rarely tolerate outsiders from other packs, and either drive them off or kill them.  Dogs rarely do that, which is why day care and dog parks are possible.

Interesting material on the behavior of wolf packs:

http://www.npwrc.usgs.gov/resource/mammals/leader/results.htm 

spiritdogs

Now we are at the root of why dogs form social groups, but not really "packs" in the wolf pack sense. 

What is "the wolf pack sense"? I mean, are you saying that dogs and people don't constitute a "pack" because they don't live in the wild, have an alpha mating pair and hunt together? Is it because they don't share 100% commonality with a pack of wild dogs? If that's the case, then I think it's kind of stating the obvious. I mean, clearly, a "social bonding group" of people and dogs in a domestic situation is going to display some differences to a pack of wild wolves...  Right? 

Do you think people who call themselves a "pack" with their dogs are under the impression that they are JUST like a wolf pack in every way? Hunting and rutting and howling at the moon? Or is it more likely that these people (like myself) are identifying with the similarities that their "bonded social group" have with a real dog pack or wolf pack? For example, some of the social interactions and relational associations between members of this group...

spiritdogs

Laugh all you want, but the reason it's funny is that you are correct that dogs and horses can be harsh with one another - the difference is that they do it in fluent "canine" and "equine", not in a foreign language.

Well with that statement you contradict yourself every time you use the clicker, clicker IS "a foreign language", i actually think that the clicker is more foreign that behavioral techniques

spiritdogs

Often, when people criticize CM's harshness, it's because they are seeing the stress and displacement signals that he either isn't seeing or isn't interpreting correctly.Fear is not "calm submission", nor is "freezing".

I actually think is the other way around, they criticize because they "see"  the stress and displacement signals where there is not any, they see "freezing" when in reality is only "calm submission" and i will give you 2 examples, *content removed, rude/baiting* Calm submissive (minute 1:46):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8PUss57ywk 

Freezing (minute 4:08)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BLhnENrXSB4 

The difference between one another can not be more clear, huge difference that proves that critics see what they want to see

spiritdogs

JMHO, but you can't lead a pack if the pack doesn't understand you.

Who was it that said if you think you have a pack, take all the leashes off and see if they stay with you or go off to do whatever it is they would prefer to do.

Second 48 and minute 1:03, walking with dogs without leashes with "pack mentality"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNA8JbnKU94 

And i'm sure lostcoyote could also show you a couple videos of him walking with his pack, in a "pack mentality" state of mind and staying with him while hiking, so we dont get fooled by some possible "editing"  

spiritdogs

 Perhaps we should be using different terminology when we talk about our relationship with dogs - we are a bonded social group, perhaps.

I just like the term family, which according to Mech is basically what a wolf pack is.  But the term family acknowledges that there is a major human influence to the group and in its modern and PC sense includes anyone regardless of blood-relation.  And although I consider myself the dog's Aunt (they had mothers), I fully consider my role a parental role.

I also think dogs can form extra-family groups which I call their social packs.  My dogs have their own social group of dogs (and humans) that they typically walk with and have known their whole lives.  I am currently babysitting a member of my dog's social group and we got together with the rest of the group last night for playtime.  They allow each other intimacies that they do not allow from other dogs.  And when they are among other dogs they are a cohesive group and will protect each other.

I don't believe that off-leash walking has anything to do with 'pack mentality'. I go to our trails dog park and see loads of people walking untrained dogs off-leash; the dogs run around and generally stay ahead of their people, stop and sniff, get passed by their people, and then run ahead of the people. This I consider to simply be "normal" dog behavior,the same way that people, even if they barely know each other, stay in "their" group when they go hiking or hunting or biking. I think it would be very abnormal to have the dog just ditch the people for no reason (unless there is something like deer to chase), and also very abnormal to constantly walk behind the people- unless trained to do so for some reason. We've met a few people with dogs from rescues that they have known for less than a week, and their dogs behaved much the same as dogs who have lived with their people for years.

I also dispute that doggy interactions actually are violent- they look and sound violent, but watch carefully, or better yet, videotape and watch in slow motion. Lots of noise, lots of flashing teeth and posturing, and I would bet a small fortune neither dog inflicts any pain on the other dog (not talking about real fights, talking about corrections). The instant one dog apologizes, the "correction" ends- and people just can't get the timing or the posturing or the "tone" of the correction right, so why bother to try to copy what you physically can't? unless you can deliver a lightening fast inhibited bite WITH YOUR TEETH don't bother trying to copy dogs (this silly "bites" with fingers don't count- ever noticed that the only time dogs poke each other with their paws it means they want to play or want attention? finger bite is sending a very confusing signal to the poor dog).

And the real reason I don't believe in "pack rules" is that I break them every day. My dogs always go out the door before I do. My dogs always walk ahead of me on walks. I feed them before I eat. They are allowed on furniture, and often have their heads higher than mine (not hard with short woman and tall dogs). I've never made the slightest effort to "dominant" them, or try to get them to "respect my authority". And yet we all live peacefully and not a single dog has ever tried to "take over" the household or exhibited any behavioral problems. They obey commands happily. We have very few inter-doggy disputes. Obviously "pack rules" are not relevant.

spiritdogs

Dogs rarely do that, which is why day care and dog parks are possible.

I think it's quiet a bit different taking dogs to a neutral place versus bringing dogs to the home environment....that's usually when things can get hairy......

Take wolf packs for instance, in nature, wolfs carve out their territory and would not allow a strange animal on their territory.....

My GSDs are not all that friendly when a rescue arrives.....when I take them to different places their protective ways change......something to think about......

spiritdogs

Now we are at the root of why dogs form social groups, but not really "packs" in the wolf pack sense.  Dog lovers have certainly colloquialized the word to mean family group, and some extend the meaning to refer to behavior within the group.  However, wolves rarely tolerate outsiders from other packs, and either drive them off or kill them.  Dogs rarely do that, which is why day care and dog parks are possible.

I don't know if I agree with this.  You could say that that is why socialisation in so necessary for puppies (perhaps even more so the primitive breeds?) because in the wild, packs don't overlap and interlopers are driven off or killed....??  No?

Gosh I'm having fun here, jumping over the fence, back and to, wheeeee....!!!   You should all try it sometime, it does wonders for the perspective.

I'm sure no one is interested, but DH and I decided is was time to show our dogs Who's Boss (see my earlier posts) and therefore we have been Canoodling all afternoon. It's certainly doing the trick and no mistake.  Not sure what the dogs think of it....  

mudpuppy

And the real reason I don't believe in "pack rules" is that I break them every day.

Until someone says what they mean by "pack rules", we might as well be talking about widgets. What is "pack rules"? This thread is titled "pack rules" and everyone seems to be talking about something different. What a mess! LOL   

OK, here are SOME "pack rules" conjured from goodness knows where... a hodge podge of places and ideas.  Some of them are laughable, others may have a basis in fact:

Rule #1 - Never let a dog "get away with" ignoring a command or he won't respect you.

Rule #2 - Never let a dog get up higher than you, or to your level.  (High places are reserved for leaders)

Rule #3 - Never let a dog eat the best stuff or sleep in the most comfy places (those are resered for leaders)

Rule #3b - Never let the dog "cover your scent" by resting in YOUR areas (but you can "cover" his by getting in his bed) 

Rule #4 - Don't let your dog ahead of you on a walk (In front is reserved for leaders)

Rule #5 - Never feed the dog before you eat or let him eat before you (leaders eat first) 

Rule #6 - Ignore your dog when he pesters you for attention of any sort, especially when you reunite after being away.  Refuse even eye contact.

Rule #7 - Always call your dog to you, never approach him.  Approaching is the action of a subordinate.

Rule #8 - Walk up to your dog to initiate games or attention, this is the sort of thing leaders do. (yes I'm confused as well)

Rule #9 - Never let your dog surge out of doors in front of you

Rule #10 - Never let your dog win a game of tug or keep any toys for himself.

Rule #11 -  Don't let your dog "hump" as this is a dominant behaviour.  (You can "mount" him to show him who is boss)

Rule #12 - Never back down if the dog growls at you

Rule #13 - If the dog makes eye contact with you, stare him out.  Looking away proves you are below him. (see rule 6 for more confusion)

Rule #14 - Routinely take his stuff off him to show him that you can and that you are alpha

Rule #15 - Pin the dog on his side or back, exposing his throat/belly to show him you are the stronger one and capable of destroying him if push came to shove.  Or, when he is resting on his side, lift his hind leg. 

Rule #16 - Resting your hand on his scruff also shows him you are "dominant". (probably a bit less emphatic though)  You can see dogs do this to each other all the time.  A lot of dogs duck their head when a human goes to pet their neck or head, there is some confusion over whether this hesitancy is due to past abuse or an unwillingness to concede "dominance" to the human.

Can anyone think of any more?  Which do you keep?  Which do you break?  Where did they come from, who thought them up, who popularised them?  Which make sense and which have got you ROFL???

 Well... Those are interesting.

I won't go through them all, but how can we be talking about DOG/human "pack rules"  while others are saying dogs don't form packs with humans?

Secondly, most of the rules you wrote here came from, as you said, "goodness knows where"... How can we be on page 7 of a discussion about something that nobody (until now) has even presented? Talk about confusion and useless argument! LOL

Oh and I follow 12 and 14, but I would restate them pretty drastically. The rest are just confusing to me. I think it's the responsibility of the original poster to let us know what "Pack Rules" means in the context of this thread... Can you do that Vivdogz?

Can anyone say what "Pack Rules" are - hopefully coming from somewhere other than (no offense, Chuffy)  "goodness knows where"? Wouldn't that help have an intelligent and meaningful discussion? If we knew what we were discussing?

FourIsCompany

 but how can we be talking about DOG/human "pack rules"  while others are saying dogs don't form packs with humans

....and still others state that dogs even form packs with other dogs! 

Chuffy

So that seemed like a good idea!

LOL It is a good idea. Here are MY pack rules:

Rule #1 – A pack needs a strong, calm, assertive leader.

Rule #2 – Many behavior issues can be traced back to the dog not getting enough exercise and discipline, in the form of rules, boundaries and limitations.

Rule #3 – NILIF is good. A pack leader should control the resources and be able to take any item from the dog at any time without protest from the dog.

That's about it.  

Well, I think most people agree that the dog needs a "leader", or a "parent"... someone to teach and guide them in this very human world.  I think it's HOW you go about achieving that equilibrium with your dog(s) that is under discussion here....

I would actually agree with you on your second one.  While some people think a lack of rules makes for a dog that thinks he is "leader" (hence the problems) I think it can just as often lead to a dog who is confused because he does not know what is expected or what is coming next.

I do agree with controlling resources, but not to the point of routinely taking dog's stuff away.  I don't think that teaches them anything, although with some dogs it will teach them they better watch out cos Twolegs are likely to swipe stuff if you don't keep a tight hold of it.  Honestly, with some dogs, you'll create a problem doing that.

As for backing down from a growl... I think you need to listen to what the dog is telling you.  In some cases, backing down might be the best way forward, in other cases it might just teach the dog "hey, doing this gets you what you want!".  So I'm on the fence with that one.

That, for me. is the problem with "pack rules" WHEREVER they come from.  Dogs and humans are living, changeable beings and I find that few rules are practical if they are fixed.  It seems senseless to me to make arbitrary rules for dogs; in order for them to live nicely with us there are so many they must live by anyway, why make more?

Hmmm, ***MY RULES***

1. Hello?  The toilet is OUTSIDE

2. Your Teeth Shall Never Touch My Skin

3.  Please leave my stuff alone.

4.  Be calm and polite to be greeted/petted

5.  Recall.  If you do nothing else, just come to me when I call.