curious..are my dogs, just not normal?

ok I have always laughed at people who say there is no such thing as dominance etc.. because well frankly my dogs would beg to differ lol then I read the artical below, and I was confused, because some of it does not fit my pack at all.

Dr. Frank Beach performed a 30-year study on dogs at Yale and UC Berkeley. Nineteen years of the study was devoted to social behavior of a dog pack. (Not a wolf pack. A DOG pack.) Some of his findings:

• Male dogs have a rigid hierarchy. my males do have a rigid heiarchy
• Female dogs have a hierarchy, but it's more variable. nope, my females heiarchy is even more rigid then my males
• When you mix the sexes, the rules get mixed up. Males try to follow their constitution, but the females have "amendments." nope, all my dogs have a very very rigid heiarchy
• Young puppies have what's called "puppy license." Basically, that license to do most anything. Bitches are more tolerant of puppy license than males are. this I agree with
• The puppy license is revoked at approximately four months of age. At that time, the older middle-ranked dogs literally give the puppy hell -- psychologically torturing it until it offers all of the appropriate appeasement behaviors and takes its place at the bottom of the social hierarchy. The top-ranked dogs ignore the whole thing. Misty and Blair were never at the bottom.
• There is NO physical domination. Everything is accomplished through psychological harassment. It's all ritualistic. *snort* tell that one to Misty and Shadow!
• A small minority of "alpha" dogs assumed their position by bullying and force. Those that did were quickly deposed. No one likes a dictator. funny, Shadow was alpha by force for years(7 to be exact), she was often challanged and always won. Misty also won by brute force, she is strong and she is young, she fought her way to the top, and she has been there for 3 years, with no signs of toppling yet, every random dog knows damn well that Misty is top lol
• The vast majority of alpha dogs rule benevolently. They are confident in their position. They do not stoop to squabbling to prove their point. To do so would lower their status because... Misty yes, once she secured herself at the top she rules calmly, she prevents fights, and all she has to do is walk up to the fighters lol Shadow however I think just enjoyed fighting lol
• Middle-ranked animals squabble. They are insecure in their positions and want to advance over other middle-ranked animals. they did when Misty allowed it, but since she has become secure as alpha she wont allow it.
• Low-ranked animals do not squabble. They know they would lose. They know their position, and they accept it. ROTFLMAO, perhaps someone outa have told this to my 2 lowest ranked pooches?
• "Alpha" does not mean physically dominant. It means "in control of resources." Many, many alpha dogs are too small or too physically frail to physically dominate. But they have earned the right to control the valued resources. An individual dog determines which resources he considers important. Thus an alpha dog may give up a prime sleeping place because he simply couldn't care less. Misty wont, she likes whats hers and too bad to anyone else lol just ask Visa, half the time we were there Misty would not let poor Visa in her own living room lol and how did Misty earn the right to control the resouces of a dog she had never met on the other dogs territory? the Alpha dog in my house is not the largest dog, but she is the strongest dog, when Shadow ruled, SHE was the strongest dog, it was only when a younger stronger dog came along that she got ousted. Perky is small and older, she is the oldest in my house and has lived here the second longest, she WANTS to be higher up, yet she is second from the bottom, she is not at all content with this and starts squabbles every single day.

Interesting. I see a lot of this in my pack.

Male dogs have a rigid hierarchy.
My alpha dog is a male and he's been alpha forever.

Female dogs have a hierarchy, but it's more variable.
My females don't have a hierarchy. The three who live in the main yard don't care about being dominant at all. Two others have their own small packs where they are supreme ruler and will use force if they have to. The other female is so dog aggressive she can not function as a pack animal at all.

When you mix the sexes, the rules get mixed up. Males try to follow their constitution, but the females have "amendments."
Only the alpha dog remain rigid in my pack. Everyone else's pack order position changes all the time.

Young puppies have what's called "puppy license." Basically, that license to do most anything. Bitches are more tolerant of puppy license than males are. Absolutely.

The puppy license is revoked at approximately four months of age. At that time, the older middle-ranked dogs literally give the puppy hell -- psychologically torturing it until it offers all of the appropriate appeasement behaviors and takes its place at the bottom of the social hierarchy. The top-ranked dogs ignore the whole thing.
Never saw any of that. Puppy liscense was revoked somewhat later, maybe at 6 months. I think because Muskwa is so dominant, the puppies who followed him never thought to question his authority.

There is NO physical domination. Everything is accomplished through psychological harassment. It's all ritualistic.
Absolutely. My alpha never fights, never starts the fights that do happen. I've never seen Muskwa in a real fight. I've seen him plenty of times look and sound like he was fighting, but without any force.

A small minority of "alpha" dogs assumed their position by bullying and force. Those that did were quickly deposed. No one likes a dictator. It has been attempted and quickly put down. There are a few lower ranking dogs who use physical domination on dogs even lower in the order. Muskwa usually steps in and puts a stop to that.

The vast majority of alpha dogs rule benevolently. They are confident in their position. They do not stoop to squabbling to prove their point. To do so would lower their status.
Absolutely. Muskwa rules with a velvet paw, never with aggression or force.

Middle-ranked animals squabble. They are insecure in their positions and want to advance over other middle-ranked animals.
Nothing worse than a Beta Bully! Hoodoo was a Beta Bully, but smart enough to never challenge Muskwa for alpha! Middle of the pack dogs cause almost every fight around here, always with lower or equal dogs. We had the most fights shortly after Hoodoo died as they tried to work out who was second in command

Low-ranked animals do not squabble. They know they would lose. They know their position, and they accept it.
Almost never see low ranking dogs fighting. A low ranking dog gets picked on here, sometimes, but they never start the fights. Earle is at the bottom of the pack order and has never even gotten involved in a pack fight.

"Alpha" does not mean physically dominant. It means "in control of resources." Many, many alpha dogs are too small or too physically frail to physically dominate. But they have earned the right to control the valued resources. An individual dog determines which resources he considers important. Thus an alpha dog may give up a prime sleeping place because he simply couldn't care less.
Yup, somedays Muskwa doesn't care what the other dogs do and they can take the bones, toys, and best spots. Somedays he won't let them. Muskwa never cares about food and always lets the other dogs eat when and where they want. Heyoka weighs close to triple what Muskwa does and could easily physically dominant him. He doesn't bother.

In general, I don't give a hoot about their pack order. I am the boss of all of them. I will not tolerate aggression or fights in my yard. They happen because of the sheer number of dogs here, but I don't care who started it or what their pack position is. Any dog involved in a fight, no matter how minor, gets punished. If they can work out their order without fighting, I just let them do so.

Maybe it's just me, but I think that if a professor who is tenured at Berkely and Harvard is commissioned to do a 30-year study, that he has a little more insight than you do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreyhoundDaddy

Maybe it's just me, but I think that if a professor who is tenured at Berkely and Harvard is commissioned to do a 30-year study, that he has a little more insight than you do.

---

I think you were right the first time. It's just you. :rolleyes:

And what's YOUR degree in? And where'd YOU study?

Exactly.

what exactly is your problem? of coarse he has more insight then I do, thats why I was confused because MY OWN PACK does NOT follow many of the 'rules', I was confused and wondering if my own pack was simpley odd.

LOL a lot of this doesnt fit my pack at all!, when we raised rotties the bitches ruled period! Emmy Lou wouldnt even hear of a male taking her spot and she was quite smaller than them! and that was after our Poodle died giving her alpha position, the poodle kept them all in line for a very long time (always wondered if they knew how small she was?) as for degrees etc? I have 5 doesn't mean I am any more qualified then the next to give out study findings and assume they are absolute! The point of studies is to create a working hypothesis and then to have it dissected by those that have an opinion or additional information pertaining to it. So your dogs may not be odd they may as it sounds just operate outside the parameters of the control group. :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr.Goodnow

LOL a lot of this doesnt fit my pack at all!, when we raised rotties the bitches ruled period! Emmy Lou wouldnt even hear of a male taking her spot and she was quite smaller than them! and that was after our Poodle died giving her alpha position, the poodle kept them all in line for a very long time (always wondered if they knew how small she was?) as for degrees etc? I have 5 doesn't mean I am any more qualified then the next to give out study findings and assume they are absolute! The point of studies is to create a working hypothesis and then to have it dissected by those that have an opinion or additional information pertaining to it. So your dogs may not be odd they may as it sounds just operate outside the parameters of the control group. :eek:

---

I agree.

Females were, also, always alpha in my house. I've always had many dogs around me and that's just the way it has always been. Woofer had rule over Rowdy, Trixie over Willy, etc. The boys always just seemed really laid back and just kind of hung around and there's never been any spats as far as males versus females go. The females have never really had any spats, either, but they were a lot more quick to get tense or snap. They were more rigid and not so easy going. But that's all just personal experience. :)

I don't think much of this is consistent with a typical group of dogs. Did he use an already established pack? Companion animals? What did the pack consist of as with male/female ratio, young/old, breed? Not much of what he says sounds like a newly formed pack, or your typical dogs brought together at a dog park, it sounds like a very well established pack (many generations).
He may not have any authority in dogs at all. He may be studying sociology or psychology, in which case he'll be very biased toward his discipline. Vetrinarians don't have to take any nutrition classes to be certified, but people rely on them as an authority for dog foods and nutrition.

Here's my personal finding after many years of being around avarage companion dogs:
"Male dogs have a rigid hierarchy." Sure


"Female dogs have a hierarchy, but it's more variable." Not at all true, famales are more rigid, but I could see a pack of unspayed, wild females being less rigid.


"When you mix the sexes, the rules get mixed up. Males try to follow their constitution, but the females have "amendments."
I've not much comment here. A hierarchy is a hierarchy whether it be all male, all female, or both.

"Young puppies have what's called "puppy license." Basically, that license to do most anything. Bitches are more tolerant of puppy license than males are. Absolutely." Males seem more tolerant to me.

"The puppy license is revoked at approximately four months of age. At that time, the older middle-ranked dogs literally give the puppy hell -- psychologically torturing it until it offers all of the appropriate appeasement behaviors and takes its place at the bottom of the social hierarchy. The top-ranked dogs ignore the whole thing."
Females have less tolerance. They do the most harassing of the puppies. Top-ranked dogs make sure puppies are not harmed.

"There is NO physical domination. Everything is accomplished through psychological harassment. It's all ritualistic."
Absolutely wrong. Physical domination is a controled scale where the dominant member will start with a growl and end with force if needed. It is controlled and not in excess. Aggressive members will use physical control often.

"A small minority of "alpha" dogs assumed their position by bullying and force. Those that did were quickly deposed. No one likes a dictator." Duh, these are the aggressive dogs that are quickly controlled by those dominant.

"The vast majority of alpha dogs rule benevolently. They are confident in their position. They do not stoop to squabbling to prove their point. To do so would lower their status."
Absolutely. Dominance and aggression are two different things, a dominant dog knows how much force is needed, if any.

"Middle-ranked animals squabble. They are insecure in their positions and want to advance over other middle-ranked animals."
Not necessarily. Aggressive dogs squabble. Middle ranked dogs know who to submit to and who to dominate and do so accordingly.

"Low-ranked animals do not squabble. They know they would lose. They know their position, and they accept it."
Very true, but you should never say never.

"Alpha" does not mean physically dominant. It means "in control of resources." Many, many alpha dogs are too small or too physically frail to physically dominate. But they have earned the right to control the valued resources. An individual dog determines which resources he considers important. Thus an alpha dog may give up a prime sleeping place because he simply couldn't care less."
This is very true.

I tend to agree, I have never used force (hitting punching kicking physical violence etc. ) to dominate my pack and at times when all were home from shows and breedings etc that could be as high as 23 or as low as 2 the point is I was always alpha within their own lives my bitch was alpha the males always (again this is an opinion even if there is a Dr in front) were a lot more tolerant of pups, all of my pack at one time or another would "test the waters" I personally believe it was to re affirm or to re establish place in the pack. Not one of my females allowed "fighting" of either sex like me they seemed to quell it with a look and body language. Dominance is not aggression and a truly aggressive dog in a large pack will either gain a position for a short time or get his butt whooped (again just my pack I am referring to all dogs like ppl differ but some traits are fairly consistent) at the moment I have just 2 dogs yet I am still alpha followed by a cocker and then the dobe, Rusty hasnt even tried to push and he seems very satified with where he fits yet he must be aware that she is only a fraction of his size? :eek: I think that your dogs are perfectly normal for YOUR pack they are obviously well loved and well read by you and why question such a good thing they are blessed and so are you Toot on him and his study!
Doc

If you look up Dr. Beach, you will find that he is a psychologist who mainly studied sexual relations in mammals. His studies involving dogs were on domesticated dogs in a wildlife setting, so his conclusions will differ from what you see in your animals as the dogs he was studying evidently did not have a human as an alpha, they were strictly a dog pack.

THAT is the whole deal. The human is pretty much always the alpha...unless the human is just that stupid and doesn't discipline their dogs. After the human is the Alpha dog or "Beta" in the pack. In this case, if the human is a female there is more of a chance that the alpha dog will be female. In most households, the dogs look at the female human as the alpha, not the male. the male doesn't take care of them, but they are a great play and chew toy!!! :)

When a pack of wild dogs get together, the hierarchy is completley changed around. The oldest male (generally) is the alpha, followed by his bitch, then the list changes all the time. The male alpha is generally the hunter, where the female sorts out pack problems.

interesting topic i must say!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zenoNzoe27

THAT is the whole deal. The human is pretty much always the alpha...unless the human is just that stupid and doesn't discipline their dogs. After the human is the Alpha dog or "Beta" in the pack. In this case, if the human is a female there is more of a chance that the alpha dog will be female. In most households, the dogs look at the female human as the alpha, not the male. the male doesn't take care of them, but they are a great play and chew toy!!! :)

When a pack of wild dogs get together, the hierarchy is completley changed around. The oldest male (generally) is the alpha, followed by his bitch, then the list changes all the time. The male alpha is generally the hunter, where the female sorts out pack problems.

interesting topic i must say!

---

Very true. This is interesting because I've always regarded Lucky as the "alpha", but I've been rethinking that idea because he uses a lot of brute force to control Giselle. However, that wouldn't make sense because true alphas need not use unnecessary physical force to keep their pack under control. Lucky would be one of those quick, but ruthless leaders who rule with dictatorship and not benevolence.

After all my rambling, I guess I understand now that he really is not an alpha, but a middle-class member (which would account for all the scuffles and squabbles in my house :p). Giselle, on the other hand, is quite happy being at the bottom of the hierarchy.

At this point, I don't know who is alpha between Gonzo and Fozzie. I'm pretty sure that will be much more clear once Fozzie hits adolescence. Right now, Gonzo will just walk away if Fozzie tries to steal his food (if I'm not there and telling Fozzie to wait), toys, and both of them pretty much equally initiate play though Gonzo is usually the one to stop it. I don't know what will happen between them, because Gonzo is just very insecure and he's really a pansey.

LOL Sophie! I can imagine that cute little ball of fluff attacking super-tall Giselle =P poor Gissie, but it is pretty odd/funny.

Interesting article and thread. Everything is really harmonious here. I lead, Tasha is second, and Tommy is happy on the bottom. Every once in awhile Tash will yell at him about something but it's pretty rare. She still treats him like her puppy in a lot of ways. She will "clean" his face and pull anything that gets stuck in his hair out. She's very tolerant of him when he gets overly playful. But if he has something and she decides she wants it, she will march right on over and just take it, no questions are asked :p. She will give a low growl if he even eyeballs something she has that she doesn't want to give up.