Be Your Dog's Best Friend
Module 1 - Section 2
Module 1 - Section 2
PACK RULE THEORIES
John Fisher, in his excellent book – ‘Diary of a Dotty Dog Doctor’ wrote the following about pack rules: -
‘The purpose of all these mental and physical gymnastics is to try and establish a dominance/submissive relationship between us and our dogs, with us being the more dominant. This is all fine if it’s how you want to live with your dog, but I have news that is going to disappoint a lot of people who have striven to reach this Alpha status – it all means diddly squat to your dog”.
In order to discuss the pack rule theories, we have to first look at why these theories came into effect: -
This terminology originated from a study of captive zoo wolves in the 1930’s and 1940’s by a Swiss animal behaviourist called Rudolph Schenkel. His conclusions were that wolves in a pack situation will fight to gain dominance, and the winner is the alpha wolf. He believed that challenges for the alpha role were daily, common occurrences, and it was only the constant aggressive actions of the alpha male and female that stopped the other dogs from ‘taking over’ alpha pack position.
Schenkel’s finding led to other behaviourists/ethologists studying captive wolves, and the findings were that there was definitely a lot of violent behaviour and struggles to achieve the alpha positions and this led to agreement of Schenkel’s initial findings. These findings were instrumental in the belief that we humans were the 'alpha' and that in order to get our dogs to do what we wanted them to do - we had to dominate them.
However, what was not considered in the original studies was the following: -
John Fisher, in his excellent book – ‘Diary of a Dotty Dog Doctor’ wrote the following about pack rules: -
‘The purpose of all these mental and physical gymnastics is to try and establish a dominance/submissive relationship between us and our dogs, with us being the more dominant. This is all fine if it’s how you want to live with your dog, but I have news that is going to disappoint a lot of people who have striven to reach this Alpha status – it all means diddly squat to your dog”.
In order to discuss the pack rule theories, we have to first look at why these theories came into effect: -
This terminology originated from a study of captive zoo wolves in the 1930’s and 1940’s by a Swiss animal behaviourist called Rudolph Schenkel. His conclusions were that wolves in a pack situation will fight to gain dominance, and the winner is the alpha wolf. He believed that challenges for the alpha role were daily, common occurrences, and it was only the constant aggressive actions of the alpha male and female that stopped the other dogs from ‘taking over’ alpha pack position.
Schenkel’s finding led to other behaviourists/ethologists studying captive wolves, and the findings were that there was definitely a lot of violent behaviour and struggles to achieve the alpha positions and this led to agreement of Schenkel’s initial findings. These findings were instrumental in the belief that we humans were the 'alpha' and that in order to get our dogs to do what we wanted them to do - we had to dominate them.
However, what was not considered in the original studies was the following: -
- The wolves were captive zoo wolves whose behaviour was totally different to that which would be found in a natural pack – no studies were done in the wild on a family pack.
- The locations they were being studied in were artificial and not their natural surroundings.
- The wolves were not all necessarily from the same pack, or even related in any way – many wolves captured were placed together.
- The natural evolution of the younger males leaving the pack to find their own territory could not occur.
David Mech
The above manner of thinking continued until David Mech (a well-known expert and author on wolf behaviour) started to publish his own findings – at the introduction of one of his articles published in 2000, regarding the situation in which the wolves were originally studied, (well worth reading, and we have supplied the link to the full article below the quote), he says: -
“In nature, however, the wolf pack is not such an assemblage. Rather, it is usually a family (Murie 1944; Young and Goldman 1944; Mech 1970, 1988; Clark 1971; Haber 1977) including a breeding pair and their offspring of the previous 1-3 years, or sometimes two or three such families (Murie 1944; Haber 1977; Mech et al. 1998).”
And.....
“As offspring begin to mature, they disperse from the pack as young as 9 months of age (Fritts and Mech 1981; Messier 1985; Mech 1987; Fuller 1989; Gese and Mech 1991). Most disperse when 1-2 years old and few remain beyond 3 years (Mech et al. 1998). Thus, young members constitute a temporary portion of most packs, and the only long-term members are the breeding pair. In contrast, captive packs often include members forced to remain together for many years (Rabb et al. 1967; Zimen 1982; Fentress et al. 1987).”
Further……
“Attempting to apply information about the behaviour of assemblages of unrelated captive wolves to the familial structure of natural packs has resulted in considerable confusion. Such an approach is analogous to trying to draw inferences about human family dynamics by studying humans in refugee camps. The concept of the alpha wolf as a "top dog" ruling
a group of similar-aged compatriots (Schenkel 1947; Rabb et al. 1967; Fox 1971a; Zimen 1975, 1982; Lockwood 1979; van Hooff et al. 1987) is particularly misleading.”
What then occurred, due to the research done by Schenkel and others, was that because our dogs are direct descendants from wolves, a direct comparison was made between wolves and dogs. It was believed that we had to act like the wolves that were studied and in order to have a good relationship with our dogs to stop them ‘taking over’, we had to ‘dominate’ them to keep them in line. Dominance is a description of a social relationship where one of the parties has an elevated status over the other.
Thankfully with the new research that has been done (and is ongoing) we are learning to understand our dogs on a much deeper level than "pack theory".
Are there similarities between dogs and wolves? Yes, apart from numerous studies and research which indicate that the modern domestic dog (Canis Familiaris) and the wolf (Canis Lupus) both have 78 chromosomes and that their mitochondrial DNA is virtually identical, there are further similarities. They have the same number of teeth, but the size of the brain is smaller in the dog, says Prof. Odendaal.
Wolves have always been regarded by man as having a certain mystique and today, in South Africa, wolf hybrids (part wolf, part dog) are being bred and many people speak about this new breed with awe – “My dog is part wolf!”, is the first thing you are told about the dog - our questions would be why - who would want one!
The Old Pack Rule Theory
The way in which a wolf pack was believed to be structured was based on the following: -
“In nature, however, the wolf pack is not such an assemblage. Rather, it is usually a family (Murie 1944; Young and Goldman 1944; Mech 1970, 1988; Clark 1971; Haber 1977) including a breeding pair and their offspring of the previous 1-3 years, or sometimes two or three such families (Murie 1944; Haber 1977; Mech et al. 1998).”
And.....
“As offspring begin to mature, they disperse from the pack as young as 9 months of age (Fritts and Mech 1981; Messier 1985; Mech 1987; Fuller 1989; Gese and Mech 1991). Most disperse when 1-2 years old and few remain beyond 3 years (Mech et al. 1998). Thus, young members constitute a temporary portion of most packs, and the only long-term members are the breeding pair. In contrast, captive packs often include members forced to remain together for many years (Rabb et al. 1967; Zimen 1982; Fentress et al. 1987).”
Further……
“Attempting to apply information about the behaviour of assemblages of unrelated captive wolves to the familial structure of natural packs has resulted in considerable confusion. Such an approach is analogous to trying to draw inferences about human family dynamics by studying humans in refugee camps. The concept of the alpha wolf as a "top dog" ruling
a group of similar-aged compatriots (Schenkel 1947; Rabb et al. 1967; Fox 1971a; Zimen 1975, 1982; Lockwood 1979; van Hooff et al. 1987) is particularly misleading.”
What then occurred, due to the research done by Schenkel and others, was that because our dogs are direct descendants from wolves, a direct comparison was made between wolves and dogs. It was believed that we had to act like the wolves that were studied and in order to have a good relationship with our dogs to stop them ‘taking over’, we had to ‘dominate’ them to keep them in line. Dominance is a description of a social relationship where one of the parties has an elevated status over the other.
Thankfully with the new research that has been done (and is ongoing) we are learning to understand our dogs on a much deeper level than "pack theory".
Are there similarities between dogs and wolves? Yes, apart from numerous studies and research which indicate that the modern domestic dog (Canis Familiaris) and the wolf (Canis Lupus) both have 78 chromosomes and that their mitochondrial DNA is virtually identical, there are further similarities. They have the same number of teeth, but the size of the brain is smaller in the dog, says Prof. Odendaal.
Wolves have always been regarded by man as having a certain mystique and today, in South Africa, wolf hybrids (part wolf, part dog) are being bred and many people speak about this new breed with awe – “My dog is part wolf!”, is the first thing you are told about the dog - our questions would be why - who would want one!
The Old Pack Rule Theory
The way in which a wolf pack was believed to be structured was based on the following: -
- There is an alpha pair in each pack
- Only that male and female would mate and breed
- The alpha male always leads the pack
- The alpha pair have first pickings of any available food
- The alpha pair decides where the pack sleeps.
- The alpha will always dominate the other pack members to achieve what it wants.
Prior to the 1900’s, a book by W. N. Hutchinson was published, which was regarded as ground breaking - Dog Breaking: The Most Expeditious, Certain and Easy Method, Whether Great Excellence or Only Mediocrity Be Required, With Odds and Ends for Those Who Love the Dog and the Gun. Primarily concerned with training hunting dogs such as pointers and setters, the book advocates a form of reward-based training, commenting on men who have "a strong arm and a hard heart to punish, but no temper and no head to instruct"
Then in the early 1900’s more people started to advocate the use of harsh techniques based on the old pack rule theory, two of them better known than others were Colonel Konrad Most and later William Koehler
Koehler trained dogs for the military initially, and his writings advocated techniques such as hanging and helicoptering (spinning around while dangling) a dog into submission. You would have thought that as we learned more about dogs that methods such as these would have disappeared, but unfortunately, they have not, and many people are still using versions of the old pack rule theories today.
Scotty encountered the ‘hanging’ method about 1997, when she took her very reactive Rotti, Zeus, to training, to try and get help for his aggression towards other dogs. As she exited the car, Zeus launched himself (with her holding on tightly behind him but being dragged as he weighed even more than she did) at another dog. Before she could turn around and move him away, an instructor grabbed the lead and within seconds had lifted Zeus up into the air suspending him from the end of the lead – the dog almost passed out! Her reaction to this – she got into the car and left – in tears! It was not because she knew of another way at that stage, it was because this to Scotty was inherently disturbing, and she was determined to find another way to help her dog, which lead to her career as a canine behaviour consultant and ultimately the launching of the www.friendsofthedog.co.za website, to help other dog owners.
Another practice that Koehler used to stop a dog digging was to fill the hole the dog had dug with water, and then the dog’s head was forced into the hole and submerged – until the dog was almost drowned.
Around about 1975 a new name in dog training emerged which had a philosophy that was “understanding is the key to communication, compassion and communication” with your dog.
This was introduced by the Monks of New Skete (A men’s monastery, founded in 1966 in the New York area. They have bred German Shepherds for over 25 years) and in principal sounded great with a promising new way of working with dogs.
However, The Monks were responsible for the introduction of the alpha roll (originally known as “Alpha-Wolf Roll-Over” (where the dog if forcibly pinned down and very often with the owner lying partially on top of the dog, or at least forcing it to stay in that position) and other physical means of punishment such as the scruff shake. The scruff shake is when one grabs both sides of the dog’s face at the same time, lifts the dog off the floor and shakes it vigorously. They often ended this off with a smack (or several) under the dog’s chin with an open hand – enough for the dog to whelp in pain.
Then in the early 1900’s more people started to advocate the use of harsh techniques based on the old pack rule theory, two of them better known than others were Colonel Konrad Most and later William Koehler
Koehler trained dogs for the military initially, and his writings advocated techniques such as hanging and helicoptering (spinning around while dangling) a dog into submission. You would have thought that as we learned more about dogs that methods such as these would have disappeared, but unfortunately, they have not, and many people are still using versions of the old pack rule theories today.
Scotty encountered the ‘hanging’ method about 1997, when she took her very reactive Rotti, Zeus, to training, to try and get help for his aggression towards other dogs. As she exited the car, Zeus launched himself (with her holding on tightly behind him but being dragged as he weighed even more than she did) at another dog. Before she could turn around and move him away, an instructor grabbed the lead and within seconds had lifted Zeus up into the air suspending him from the end of the lead – the dog almost passed out! Her reaction to this – she got into the car and left – in tears! It was not because she knew of another way at that stage, it was because this to Scotty was inherently disturbing, and she was determined to find another way to help her dog, which lead to her career as a canine behaviour consultant and ultimately the launching of the www.friendsofthedog.co.za website, to help other dog owners.
Another practice that Koehler used to stop a dog digging was to fill the hole the dog had dug with water, and then the dog’s head was forced into the hole and submerged – until the dog was almost drowned.
Around about 1975 a new name in dog training emerged which had a philosophy that was “understanding is the key to communication, compassion and communication” with your dog.
This was introduced by the Monks of New Skete (A men’s monastery, founded in 1966 in the New York area. They have bred German Shepherds for over 25 years) and in principal sounded great with a promising new way of working with dogs.
However, The Monks were responsible for the introduction of the alpha roll (originally known as “Alpha-Wolf Roll-Over” (where the dog if forcibly pinned down and very often with the owner lying partially on top of the dog, or at least forcing it to stay in that position) and other physical means of punishment such as the scruff shake. The scruff shake is when one grabs both sides of the dog’s face at the same time, lifts the dog off the floor and shakes it vigorously. They often ended this off with a smack (or several) under the dog’s chin with an open hand – enough for the dog to whelp in pain.
It was originally believed that the Alpha Roll was dominant behaviour when one wolf pinned the other wolf down and forced it to submit. However, the theory behind the alpha roll was based on research of captive wolves kept in an area too small for the numbers of wolves and was made up of wolves that would not have been together in a natural environment. Much of the research has proven false, especially that of the alpha roll. Also, the name was a misnomer by so called wolf experts as it bears little relation to the natural behaviour shown by wolves.
The closest to the alpha roll is the behaviour that is called ‘pinning’, and this does not seem to serve as a correction or a punishment and is often seen in pups and older wolves playing.
Are these people cruel and unthinking? No, not at all, they were working, and training dogs in the manner they believed was correct! Think about it, the only collar that was used for a dog not that long ago was the choke train – we used, and did what we believed the ‘experts’ told us.
What is hard to understand however, is when people are shown that there is another, less invasive manner of working with dogs available today (and it works so well!) why so many people will insist in sticking to the old ways. We believe that this is either fear of admitting that they could have been wrong, or is based on the Milgram experiment, where people are so ingrained in their ways and the believe that the ‘authority’ involved, could never be wrong, that they just can’t change.
Recent research indicates that domestic dogs do not form packs with dominance hierarchies in the true sense of the word, although opinions do vary in this regard. Many of the dominance beliefs were based on what are now known to be ritualistic displays of wolf behaviour and many of these have been disproved by further research on the subject by numerous experts such as L. Boitani, F. Francisci, Coppinger, Dunbar and other well informed and knowledgeable people. Due to further research that has been done, it is now questionable as to whether the pack rules even apply to wolves!
If we therefore continue to apply the old-fashioned pack rules, the end result will be detrimental to both dog and its handler, and they will never achieve the true bond that can develop between dog and handler, where the relationship is based on trust and mutual respect. Should respect not be a two-way street that has to be earned, not enforced?
“Intelligent dogs rarely want to please people who they do not respect”
W. R. Koehler
Is there any merit to pack rules?
Although we believe that the old pack rules really have no place in our modern society with the more modern methods we have available to us, there is however nothing wrong with teaching your dog to be well mannered, as we would do with our children, which is why we believe that House Rules are essential. Every home and situation is different, and the important thing is that if you ask a dog to get off the furniture, release a tug toy etc, it is expected to happen. If the dog ignores the request and continues doing this ‘own thing’ then the question to ask is "where has the training failed – what have I not taught my dog correctly” - not assume that he is exhibiting alpha/dominance behaviour.
Our job as behaviourist, trainers and guardians is not one that should be taken lightly. If we think about it, we as the owners, control all our dogs’ needs and resources – food and water, veterinary care, exercise and even reproduction. By utilizing these resources, we can get our dogs to do anything we like without the use of force and physical chastisement and with the dog being rewarded for performing the behaviours we request.
As Patricia McConnell says “our house dogs are sitting on a veritable gold mine of resources”.
To investigate some of the common pack theories/beliefs in more detail we have split them into sections to examine whether there are any benefits to them at all: -
The Alpha Roll – This is a severe modification in the old pack rule theory which was based on the behaviour of the wolf when it wanted to discipline or control other members of the pack. The Alpha Roll involves swiftly rolling a dog onto its back and holding it there until it submits by lying still and looking away from the owner. It was even suggested that if the owner growled and shook the dog the process would be even more effective!
However, these initial studies were incorrect as we have mentioned, and what the new breed of Ethologists have found is that when a wolf wanted to dominate another, he would ‘muzzle grasp’ (Place his own muzzle, mouth wide open & teeth bared GENTLY over the muzzle of another wolf) (Roger Abrantas). Now here is where the difference came in – the pinned/grasped wolf would then roll over and submit voluntarily. Ian Dunbar states that if a wolf did flip another wolf against its will, then its intention would be to kill the other wolf.
It is doubtful that we fully comprehend the amount of damage that a method such as the alpha roll could cause apart from the fact that if the dog was prone to aggression, it could well feel the need to defend itself and the owner could end up being seriously hurt. It could also occur that the dog did not act aggressively towards the owner, rather to a child or somebody else where it felt it was threatened – this could be something so simple, as the person raising up their arm. This then says nothing about how much harm would be done to the relationship between the two. Using physical force of any kind reduces your ‘rank’ in your dog’s eyes.
The closest to the alpha roll is the behaviour that is called ‘pinning’, and this does not seem to serve as a correction or a punishment and is often seen in pups and older wolves playing.
Are these people cruel and unthinking? No, not at all, they were working, and training dogs in the manner they believed was correct! Think about it, the only collar that was used for a dog not that long ago was the choke train – we used, and did what we believed the ‘experts’ told us.
What is hard to understand however, is when people are shown that there is another, less invasive manner of working with dogs available today (and it works so well!) why so many people will insist in sticking to the old ways. We believe that this is either fear of admitting that they could have been wrong, or is based on the Milgram experiment, where people are so ingrained in their ways and the believe that the ‘authority’ involved, could never be wrong, that they just can’t change.
Recent research indicates that domestic dogs do not form packs with dominance hierarchies in the true sense of the word, although opinions do vary in this regard. Many of the dominance beliefs were based on what are now known to be ritualistic displays of wolf behaviour and many of these have been disproved by further research on the subject by numerous experts such as L. Boitani, F. Francisci, Coppinger, Dunbar and other well informed and knowledgeable people. Due to further research that has been done, it is now questionable as to whether the pack rules even apply to wolves!
If we therefore continue to apply the old-fashioned pack rules, the end result will be detrimental to both dog and its handler, and they will never achieve the true bond that can develop between dog and handler, where the relationship is based on trust and mutual respect. Should respect not be a two-way street that has to be earned, not enforced?
“Intelligent dogs rarely want to please people who they do not respect”
W. R. Koehler
Is there any merit to pack rules?
Although we believe that the old pack rules really have no place in our modern society with the more modern methods we have available to us, there is however nothing wrong with teaching your dog to be well mannered, as we would do with our children, which is why we believe that House Rules are essential. Every home and situation is different, and the important thing is that if you ask a dog to get off the furniture, release a tug toy etc, it is expected to happen. If the dog ignores the request and continues doing this ‘own thing’ then the question to ask is "where has the training failed – what have I not taught my dog correctly” - not assume that he is exhibiting alpha/dominance behaviour.
Our job as behaviourist, trainers and guardians is not one that should be taken lightly. If we think about it, we as the owners, control all our dogs’ needs and resources – food and water, veterinary care, exercise and even reproduction. By utilizing these resources, we can get our dogs to do anything we like without the use of force and physical chastisement and with the dog being rewarded for performing the behaviours we request.
As Patricia McConnell says “our house dogs are sitting on a veritable gold mine of resources”.
To investigate some of the common pack theories/beliefs in more detail we have split them into sections to examine whether there are any benefits to them at all: -
The Alpha Roll – This is a severe modification in the old pack rule theory which was based on the behaviour of the wolf when it wanted to discipline or control other members of the pack. The Alpha Roll involves swiftly rolling a dog onto its back and holding it there until it submits by lying still and looking away from the owner. It was even suggested that if the owner growled and shook the dog the process would be even more effective!
However, these initial studies were incorrect as we have mentioned, and what the new breed of Ethologists have found is that when a wolf wanted to dominate another, he would ‘muzzle grasp’ (Place his own muzzle, mouth wide open & teeth bared GENTLY over the muzzle of another wolf) (Roger Abrantas). Now here is where the difference came in – the pinned/grasped wolf would then roll over and submit voluntarily. Ian Dunbar states that if a wolf did flip another wolf against its will, then its intention would be to kill the other wolf.
It is doubtful that we fully comprehend the amount of damage that a method such as the alpha roll could cause apart from the fact that if the dog was prone to aggression, it could well feel the need to defend itself and the owner could end up being seriously hurt. It could also occur that the dog did not act aggressively towards the owner, rather to a child or somebody else where it felt it was threatened – this could be something so simple, as the person raising up their arm. This then says nothing about how much harm would be done to the relationship between the two. Using physical force of any kind reduces your ‘rank’ in your dog’s eyes.
Never let a dog lie in a strategic place such as top of stairs
If we examine the pack rule of never letting a dog lie in the hall or doorway, we will find that this was based on the theory that an Alpha dog always positions himself so that he can see the comings and goings of his pack. As Barry Easton says: - ‘a large pack doesn’t always stay together all the time, so it doesn’t matter where alpha positions himself, he won’t be able to see the comings and goings of his whole pack”. He further suggests that if the Alpha does position himself strategically, it would be more to do with spotting intruders, rather like the family dog lying next to the gate watching the comings and goings in the street.
This is one of the very few pack rules that makes a bit of sense to us. Not from the point of view that it is dominance behaviour in any way, more from the aspect of safety. If you have elderly, infirm people or toddlers and children in the house, it makes sense to teach the dog its own ‘place’ to lie down in to prevent people tripping over it.
People go through doorways first.
For the same reason, the second so-called rule of people having to go through the doorway first based on the principle that it was the Alpha’s privilege to go through first. Let’s look at it from this perspective – are you going to go out in the rain first to allow your dog to eliminate? He’s welcome to go by himself!
We do believe that in the situation where elderly or infirm people are staying in the house or a Mom with a young child, that the dog should be taught the ‘wait’ cue for when it is necessary. This just ensures that nobody is knocked off their feet and as far as we are concerned, it is ‘polite’ behaviour.
Teaching and learning are not encouraged at all by intimidation. Many of the old pack rules were based on dominance behaviour from the owner, and this is the prime reason why they should be discarded. Where is the connection that when a dog enters our home he is joining our ‘pack’ and as such he should defer to a leader and be subordinate? Instead he should become a part of our family and therefore the House Rules we put into place would apply, just as they apply for our children in the home environment, in schools, work places and civilized society in general. Dogs very seldom exhibit so called pack behaviour, so we don’t see how they would understand what we are telling them when we exhibit this supposedly alpha wolf behaviour.
If we examine the pack rule of never letting a dog lie in the hall or doorway, we will find that this was based on the theory that an Alpha dog always positions himself so that he can see the comings and goings of his pack. As Barry Easton says: - ‘a large pack doesn’t always stay together all the time, so it doesn’t matter where alpha positions himself, he won’t be able to see the comings and goings of his whole pack”. He further suggests that if the Alpha does position himself strategically, it would be more to do with spotting intruders, rather like the family dog lying next to the gate watching the comings and goings in the street.
This is one of the very few pack rules that makes a bit of sense to us. Not from the point of view that it is dominance behaviour in any way, more from the aspect of safety. If you have elderly, infirm people or toddlers and children in the house, it makes sense to teach the dog its own ‘place’ to lie down in to prevent people tripping over it.
People go through doorways first.
For the same reason, the second so-called rule of people having to go through the doorway first based on the principle that it was the Alpha’s privilege to go through first. Let’s look at it from this perspective – are you going to go out in the rain first to allow your dog to eliminate? He’s welcome to go by himself!
We do believe that in the situation where elderly or infirm people are staying in the house or a Mom with a young child, that the dog should be taught the ‘wait’ cue for when it is necessary. This just ensures that nobody is knocked off their feet and as far as we are concerned, it is ‘polite’ behaviour.
Teaching and learning are not encouraged at all by intimidation. Many of the old pack rules were based on dominance behaviour from the owner, and this is the prime reason why they should be discarded. Where is the connection that when a dog enters our home he is joining our ‘pack’ and as such he should defer to a leader and be subordinate? Instead he should become a part of our family and therefore the House Rules we put into place would apply, just as they apply for our children in the home environment, in schools, work places and civilized society in general. Dogs very seldom exhibit so called pack behaviour, so we don’t see how they would understand what we are telling them when we exhibit this supposedly alpha wolf behaviour.
