curious..are my dogs, just not normal?

[GreyhoundDaddy]

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

Exactly.

[cali]

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.

[DrKym]

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.

[Sevaede]

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.

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.

[IRescue452]

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.

[DrKym]

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? 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

[Lady's Human]

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.