Yesterday I was fortunate enough to attend a seminar given by Jean Donaldson. It was titled "Stop Whispering and Speak Up for Your Dogs: Debunking the Dominance Myth in Dog Training."
Continuing education is very important to trainers because new things about dogs and behavior are being learned all the time. This helps us as trainers know what we can do to make and keep training humane and effective for our dogs. I think I have said this before but I personally believe behavior seminars should be mandatory for ALL trainers. To many get focused on specific sports or methods and ignore behavior info thinking they already know the material. I would counter their arguments by saying I have ALWAYS learned something useful at every seminar I have attended. Whatever the topic, behavior or otherwise. This one was no different.
One of the things I learned had to do with dogs as a pack animal. Simplified she explained what a true in the wild wolf pack consisted of a breeding pair and their offspring. The offspring then grows up and goes away to find their own mates. The pack in my head is more probably based on captive wolves that have learned to live by creating a social structure within a confined area. This along with examples of feral dogs and their behaviors gave me alot to think about. It turns out they do not generally chose to live in packs long term and only pack up for sexual reproduction or to scavange or hunt food, IF it is beneficial to them. That said they are very social animals and do bond with people as their family unit.
Even though I may still think of dogs as a pack animal in my head, albeit defined differently with dogs as family units, they are not a pack animal in the way I previously thought. I do wonder if breed plays into this behavior at all however. Are some more primitive than others and does that change their social behavior in a group? Food for some thought. And regardless of pack dynamics, or if we think of them as a pack animal or not, dogs are not looking to dominate our every move. Most are simply being dogs and are either trying to control a resource or get something they want. Jean said to ask yourself, what is the dog DOING, not what is the dog THINKING.
I do believe there are some dogs who care about status over humans though they represent a very small percentage of dogs out there. Every dog is an indivudual. But one would caution, if you hear hoofbeats over the hill, think horse, not zebra. A zebra is possible, yet unlikely.
Because of the new info I have learned which has challenged my thinking on the topic, I give you my Growl article updated and I believe now more appropriate.
Why A Growl is Good ~ ReDux
*
My new Akita puppy Jack was on his bed chewing a fresh bone. I sat down beside him to work on desensitizing him to having things taken away. There is little of higher value to a dog than a fresh bone. I asked him in a singsong voice “What have you got there?” and put my hand on the bone. His response was to clench the bone and give a low growl. My husband was watching this exchange and was flabbergasted when I calmly got up without saying a word to go get my training bag with treats in it. “Why didn’t you correct him?” was his question to me. “And why are you about to give him some treats?”
*
Dogs are a different species. I say that because it seems many people believe a dog should respond or be taught to respond to things the same way a human would. That is just unfair to the dog. Now some would have given the dog a correction and just taken the bone away. I’m sure I could have gotten the bone too as he was only a pup at the time. But what would that have taught the dog? It certainly would have made bones even higher on the value list, which in turn could have escalated the aggression in the future the next time someone tried to remove that item. They do remember from past experiences.
*
The other thing that would have done would be to teach the dog NOT to growl. You might be wondering why this is important. Remember that different species bit? Well dogs communicate differently than humans as well. Growling is actually a good thing! It is one way your dog is communicating with you. We need to start listening to their communication instead of repressing it. Why? Because to take away that communication can spell disaster in the future.
*
Dogs use a lot of body language in their communication. Not only do they growl but their body will tense up. Growling is almost always preceded with the stiffening of the body and what I call “the hairy eyeball”. Mothers know this look and use it often. (most commonly in a store or in public with their kids) It is a non-verbal warning. A dog would be able to see this subtle sign of warning from another dog. We humans are less perceptive (in general) and usually push it with the dog to the point of them needing to progress to a verbal or more noticeable cue. The stiffening and hairy eyeball is what I call step one in a warning.
*
Step two will be either a low growl or the showing of teeth with a raised lip. Now consider that the dog is TRYING to avoid an altercation. It is using everything in its’ bag of tricks to get the point across. What happens if we correct a dog at this point? Well depending on the dog and situation, we either teach them NOT to give a warning, or we get bitten.
*
OK so say we keep pushing this dog and he hasn't resorted to a serious bite. What happens next usually is step three, or a nip. It might also be an air snap. There is a progression to this in proper dog language. They will only use the amount of warning signals (what we generally label as aggression) needed to end the altercation. If the other dog doesn’t listen and respond to the warnings, you may end up with an all out fight IF the dog doing the warning doesn’t decide to give up the bone. (Let me point out I am talking about dogs that have learned proper dog communication with other dogs.) If that other dog is a person and either ignores the warnings, or wants to prove a point, they will probably get bitten. How serious the bite is depends on where the dog connects or how much force the person tries to use against the dog. (which results in the dog using more force back) A bite to the face usually causes more damage than a bite to the arm.
*
Many dog bites are in the face because when a dog goes to correct another dog they commonly bite on the muzzle of the other dog. (Corrections and attacks are two separate events for the purpose of this article. Most attacks are really mislabled bitting incidents.) Children are also on face level with an adult dog and so are more commonly bitten than adults. Staring into a dogs face can also cause a bite because it is perceived in dog language as a threat or a challenge. Unfortunately children do this a lot. Humans, lacking muzzles, damage much easier than another dog. We also receive a lot of damage because we tend to pull away during a bite, which causes our more fragile (than dogs) skin to tear. I call step four a bite even though a nip is also a bite, just on a different, some would say less serious, level. By less serious I am speaking in tissue damage terms, not necessarily psychologically less damaging.
*
So what would happen in this same scenario if the dog had been taught not to growl? Someone would get bitten because the dog didn't give a warning first. The dog would have LEARNED not to give a warning. Then you end up with a dog you cannot predict which can be very dangerous. Who would be to blame for that bite? The person that took away that dogs method to communicate of course. A dog can only respond like a dog.
*
OK so back to Jack and his bone. I sat down and played “trade the treat for the bone” game with him. I made sure to praise him for giving up the bone AND I always gave it back to him after the trade. This way he learns that he will get the item back and it is worth it to give it up to me in the first place. After a 15 minutes session I stopped and let him chew his bone in peace. Of course I explained the process to my husband as I played with Jack. He looked skeptical at first. After a 20 minute rest I walked over and asked Jack for the bone which I got with no protest. That proved my point for hubby and Jack again got the bone back with praise. Ten minutes after that Missy, our French bulldog, had cleaned her bone of the marrow and decided she wanted Jacks to work on. Missy is the head dog in our house regardless of her smaller size. She slowly walked over and gave him “the look”. Jack looked back at her, huffed a sigh, got up and calmly walked away.
*
Tail wags,
Marie Finnegan
K-9 Solutions Dog Training Inc.
- Login or register to post comments
- More by Marie Finnegan









Super Kudos!
Marie,
There is nothing more awesome than a person who is willing to keep their mind open to new information! If there's one thing I believe we shouldn't do as dog trainers (or humans in general), it is to personalize the information we have so much that we can't let go of it when better information comes along.
I just had a training session with a man in which I was attempting to give him new information (to him) about the flaws of dominance theory. I loved that he was so honest when he said, "That's going to be difficult to get out of my head, it's been there for a long time." But, like you, he was willing to think some new thoughts.
Cheers!
Cindy
Nice Post
I love the title of Jean's seminar. This "pack theory" that so dominates popular conceptions of dogs is so destructive. When I give talks or discuss this with clients, I've come up with a nice analogy* to drive home just how misguided this way of thinking is. First, I'll mention the origins of "pack theory" in the study of captive packs of unrelated wolves and how different their behavior is from wolves in the wild. Then I discuss the concept of neotony, or the retention by adults in a species of physical or behavioral traits previously seen only in juveniles. Dogs are certainly neotenic (I think that's the right word), which I'll sometimes illustrate by talking about Belyaev's work attempting to "tame" fur foxes. So, I establish two basic concepts:
1) Pack theory is based on misguided observations of wolves living as captives in an unnatural environment that leads to extremely high levels of conflict.
2) Our dogs are very different creatures than wolves. While they have many similarities, dogs are the perpetual children of the canine family.
The conclusion I offer stemming from these two facts is that interacting with our dogs based on popular conceptions of pack theory is like teaching a human kindergarten with techniques based on studying prison gangs. It's a little simplistic, but it always seems to drive the point home nicely.
(*I'm fairly certain that I came up with this analogy on my own, but if I inadvertently stole it from a book or a talk I attended, I hope someone will let me know.)
Thank you
Cindy, Thank you. I knew you would appreciate the "light bulb moment" I had. Especially after the last debate we had involving the issue. I think it was about the presentation of material and timing for me. It finally made sense.
Jeff, She used the fox study as one of her points as well. And also mentioned prisoners as groups for studying normal human behavior and how ridiculous that would be. (similar to your analogy) I like your examples. They are easy to understand. Which for our clients is very important.
Tail wags,
Marie Finnegan
K-9 Solutions Dog Training Inc.