hairybeasty wrote:
I mean in all societies there is a leader,that others follow,be that lions,wolves,people,dogs, deer,etc.
After all,with no leader and no stucture to a group there would be in-fighting,no feeding order,and indiscriminate mating.
None of this would contribute to either the survival of the pack or to the species as a whole...

In human society we have fighters, sex gods/godesses but they don't try to lead. We have G.Brown/G.Bush who lead/have lead but the rest of the human pack wouldn't want to mate with them.

True indeed to the last post! Just hrking back to the domestication thread, did anyone watch the Martin Clunes programme showing the African Wild dog(Lycaon Pictus which translates as painted wolf)? He stated that it was the only dog species to have proved impossible to train/domesticate? It was interesting as they were in a breeding for conservation centre. There is an interesting description on wikipedia where they talk about the pack having alpha status dogs but a submission not dominance culture and a non bloodshed approach to dominance.

verenav wrote:
I do not think the dog feels " guilt " when reprimanded , just plain fear ...new studies btw say , no real " packs " in dogs , rather " loose groups of friends " , which is also what I see ; also ,that dogs never really grow up in comparison to wolves but remain more comparible to juveniles , still dependent on the adults ( us humans in this case ) .
I cringe when I see all those , totally outdated, traning mehtods that are still based on physical "abuse " , sorry , this is , what I feel ( others call it " corrections " )and hate , hate , hate the word " alpha leader " meanwhile as it seems to be the excuse to do basically anything to a dog ..... Within my 4 there is no such thing as an alpha leader ( never was in any group of dogs I had ) , one might be , in the end , the "highest ranking " , but this doesn't really show , only when you look closely - usually within a group of dogs there will be a lot of different roles , everyone can be a leader in "her field of expertise " and the others will head - and , I think being a ' leader ' in a group of dogs is rather about responsibilities than anything else .

I also do not think a reprimanded dog feels "guilt",but just plain fear.
It knows that it has crossed the line of acceptable behaviour within it's pack, and knows instinctively that "retribution" is just aroond the corner.
I do take issue with the idea that placing oneself as an "alpha leader" is an excuse to do practically anything to a dog.
It doesnt matter whether you beat a dog or just use your voice,fear of retribution will be the result, but this will only work if you have earnt the respect of your dog(s).
As all leaders you have to earn the title of boss, alpha leader,or whatever you call it,otherwize as soon as your back's turned,choas comes out to play...
I mean do you think that your dog stays out of the kitchen bin because it wants to, or because it fears retribution from you,the pack leader?

Actually mine do stay usually out of the kitchen because there is nothing comfy for them to ly on .... Otherwise I would say of course they have been trained that way - be it with fear/dominant methods or more cooperative /positive ones .

Dear verenav,I meant the bin in the kitchen.
But you're right either dominant or cooperative methods work just as well.
My point is that the dog must be prewired in order to tolerate the relationship between us.

Being the highly sociable , cooperative beings they are (not talking about humans here.....) this partnership makes a lot of sense to me !

Ironstone wrote:
Ethical pooches

“Every dog owner knows a pooch can learn the house rules – and when she breaks one, her subsequent grovelling is usually ingratiating enough to ensure quick forgiveness," wild canine societies may be even better analogues for early hominid groups – and when we study dogs, wolves and coyotes, we discover behaviours that hint at the roots of human morality.”
Read the above in my newspaper this morning. Quite thought provoking. Why do dogs have a keen sense of right and wrong? Or do you agree with that statement? And can the roots of human morality be found in canines?


As later posts state morality and the sense of right and wrong can be seen many ways.
Surely that grovelling is an inbuilt reaction to avoid the wrath of the boss,in order to ensure both parties survive? I mean, in a wild state,with no vet ,any flesh wound is sure to become infected?
By hinting at the roots of human morality did you perhaps mean the instinct to put the survival of the family group before that of the individual's wishes?

hairybeasty wrote:
Ironstone wrote:
Ethical pooches

“Every dog owner knows a pooch can learn the house rules – and when she breaks one, her subsequent grovelling is usually ingratiating enough to ensure quick forgiveness," wild canine societies may be even better analogues for early hominid groups – and when we study dogs, wolves and coyotes, we discover behaviours that hint at the roots of human morality.”
Read the above in my newspaper this morning. Quite thought provoking. Why do dogs have a keen sense of right and wrong? Or do you agree with that statement? And can the roots of human morality be found in canines?


As later posts state morality and the sense of right and wrong can be seen many ways.
Surely that grovelling is an inbuilt reaction to avoid the wrath of the boss,in order to ensure both parties survive? I mean, in a wild state,with no vet ,any flesh wound is sure to become infected?
By hinting at the roots of human morality did you perhaps mean the instinct to put the survival of the family group before that of the individual's wishes?


It is said that humans prospered so well because of an innate desire to help other beings beyond our immediate existance , whether that be family, tribe, village etc... but going beyond that we were able to communicate and offer assistance to strangers and then eventually barter/trade and so on and so forth ..

Canines work well together in tight family groups because their instinct to survive tells them thats how it works. If 2 distinct "families" came together , no doubt the fur would fly. Within each family unit, each animal has it's own personality and it's own temperament and "job" within the unit. There is an Alpha , but it is not a dog, it is a bitch. She is the only one who gets to mate and she who chooses a mate.



We have seen it time and again where our bitch will leave a toy lying on the floor and not pay attention to it until one of our other dogs comes anywhere near it, then she will growl and tell them off and chase them away. It's not that she wants the toy, she is using it as a method to remind everyone else in the pack that she is top dog.

When a dog chastises, they have varying degrees of escalation. Very rarely would they come to blows and actually make physical contact. They start off just with body language (staring/hackles/tail down), then move onto a growl, baring of teeth, air snapping, if that does not get the point across they will punch , with their muzzle - mouth closed. Last resort is to actually use their teeth to bite.

If you are approaching a dog that is displays any of these, they may not start from the bottom and progress through each level. An Ultra confident dog might just go straight in for the kill !

See , this also has been re- evaluated , no loger the idea that only the " alpha female " gets to mate , over they ears others get , too - but usually only one per year . And , with regards to body language , there is so much more what they do , tons and tons of so called " calming signals " ( see Turid Rugaaas books/works ) before they actually take it a step further - being social hunters ( ok , also lots of scavengiung done ...) and depending on their groups ( or packs in the case of wolves ) they need to stay healthy and fit and not waste this and energies on squabbles .
With regards to special toys and similar , even this changes here , no fixed boss ( other than me ) - even the pupster will get the ( supposedly) " alpha " to stay away from her toy in the exact same manner as you describe it - it all seems to depend on who had the toy/bone/whatever first and how the mood of the day is.

That may be the way in a deerhound only house,try having terriers,they will draw blood over the most silly bit of old rabbit fur or well chewed bone...
They will fight over nothing to the stitches stage..

I don't know , I used to breed Cairnterriers , still love them - and thus was in contact with many other terrier people - had up to 3 at a time and only a few squabbles . But then you are right , the huge difference being that sighthonds belong to the so called " primitive dogs " , which seem to be made up of mostly ancient and quite close to the origin in their mindsets breeds - if wild dogs/wolves would fight like this over " nothing " their packs would not stand a chance to survive...

hairybeasty wrote:
That may be the way in a deerhound only house,try having terriers,they will draw blood over the most silly bit of old rabbit fur or well chewed bone...
They will fight over nothing to the stitches stage..

Our terrier will go for DH over trifles but he never inflicts any damage. Most he has ever done was a small cut, just once. DH always gives way, except for once when terrer stole his bone when he was a juvenile, terrier got a real shaking for that.

Pack law is something that many dog training forums promote and dispute at great length. The biggest issue seems to revolve around what is acceptable in terms of control within a domestic pack. You can't use food and praise to control every situation that crops up - and if you've a dog that is naturally food aggressive then this is likely to exacerbate the situation not improve it. It's no surprise that many dogs become aggressive in a training class and nothing to do with enclosed spaces, just that they see a threat to the food that their owner is carrying.

I would agree that there is no evidence that dogs feel guilt, any more than there is evidence that they show LOVE. I also don't believe for a moment that a dog ever does anything to please me, more lkely APPEASE me, but I don't have a problem in that knowledge. The problem in accepting pack law is in knowing how to use it, and not abuse it. Take the Wolfman. He's WELL respectful of his pack of wolves, treats them right, feeds them properly, and never had to resort to dominance to regain some position from his pack when he had been away on that extended break. Now I'm not saying we should treat our dogs as wolves exclusively. Recent evidence shows that dogs are actually more closely related to the hyena (look at the jaws) but the ability to hunt and live as a unit is the same.

Dogs should be treated with respect not abused, but that doesn't mean we can't be in charge. We accept no crap from any of our dogs. ALWAYS control as soon as the dog does something we're not happy with, and expect immediate acquiesence from them. We have never had to lay a hand (or foot!) on them - except in praise - but we've behaved in the same way that they behave to one another to gain/maintain our position. You can make a low growl or snap your teeth at the wife's collie boy and that's more than enough to tell him he's overstepped the mark.

When it comes to lines of control - we see our more senior dogs of our 6 dog pack (3 collies, springer, lurcher and Mac ) setting up the pups to play, and letting them be quite rough, goading them to the point that they overstepped the mark and then controlling it. They will also take food/toy off a subordinate, however much they try to defend the food. Equally, they will leave food for a pack member that needs it more (pups/pregnant or lactating female).

interesting regarding the Hyena. I watch a doco about a Hyena family not so long ago. There was an Alpha bitch who ruled the pack. She ate the most, she tried to have exclusive rights to breeding and she layed down the law and also did the least. Trouble was she was a bit psycho, she ruled with cruelty and was going to get her family killed with very erratic behaviour. Finally the other bitch stepped up and they had a huge row causing severe injuries to the former alpha. This fight put her at the bottom of the pack. She could not approach for food till everyone else had finished and she had to earn her keep.
It was a very interesting show. Whike the former alpha was in charge the pack couldn't function properly and nearly starved. Once the new alpha took charge the group worked effectively again as a team.

It's interesting how this team work/co-operative idea keeps cropping up in this thread.
I suppose that this must be the basis of all succesful packs.
But if alpha status must be earned within a pack,does anyone have any thoughts on how this comes about if not through dominance?
I mean a dog may be the best at it's job but does that make it a leader?

I believe the answer is respect. For a dog to become a leader it must be trusted and respected by the entire pack. Although the dog may well be the most physically powerfull of the entire pack that is not the whole story. The dog must also be well balanced and trusted by the pack to be a wise leader.

Robb wrote:
I believe the answer is respect. For a dog to become a leader it must be trusted and respected by the entire pack. Although the dog may well be the most physically powerfull of the entire pack that is not the whole story. The dog must also be well balanced and trusted by the pack to be a wise leader.

I see!! No wonder our own society has gone to hell in a dogbasket!!

Read the following in the newspaper this morning - more research on the evolution of the dog - for those interested...


Dogs domesticated in Middle East, not Asia

From French poodles to German shepherds, domestic dogs likely trace most of their ancestry to the Middle East, as opposed to East Asian origins suggested by previous research, a genetic study reported on Wednesday.

The findings, published in the online edition of the scientific journal Nature, support an archeological record that closely links the domestication of dogs in the Middle East with the rise of human civilization there, scientists said.

"It's significant because this is where civilization developed, and dogs were part of that," said Robert Wayne, professor of evolutionary biology at the University of California, Los Angeles, and a senior author of the study.

The region, often referred to as the Fertile Crescent, includes much of modern-day Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan -- "the same area where domestic cats and many of our livestock originated, and where agriculture first developed," he said.

The study is based on genetic comparisons between more than 900 dogs representing 85 breeds and over 200 wild grey wolves -- their closest living wild relative -- from around the globe, including North America, Europe, East Asia and the Middle East.

What they discovered was the vast majority of dogs share more unique genetic markers with grey wolves from the Mideast than with other wolf populations. A kinship to European wolves also was found, but to a lesser extent, Wayne said.

One notable exception was the finding of a close genetic link between a small number of East Asian dog breeds and wolves from China, suggesting some intermingling between the two. But the new research contradicts an earlier, more limited, genetic study suggesting a close ancestry of all dogs to wolves from East Asia and China. The newer research was far more comprehensive and "is much more consistent with the archeological record," Wayne said.

"We know that dogs from the Middle East were closely associated with humans because they were found in human burial sites" there, he said. In one famous example, the remains of a puppy were found curled up in the arms of a human skeleton. But the earliest bond between people and "man's best friend" was probably more often a love-hate relationship that persists in parts of the world to this day, and helps explain a cultural ambivalence toward dogs in the very region where they likely originated.

The archeological record of dogs dates back 31,000 years to the remains of a Great Danelike specimen found in Belgium. The first Mideast dogs appeared 12,000 to 13,000 years ago.

Although agriculture and animal husbandry go hand in hand, the first people to domesticate dogs from wild wolves probably were nomadic hunter-gatherers, who were followed at a distance by canine interlopers in search of scraps.

That relationship likely matured over thousands of years "to the point where these pro-to-dogs were living in proximity with humans," and were often more of a nuisance than they were companions, Wayne said.

"Eventually, dogs provided protection, an early warning system, maybe even helped out with the hunt, and then eventually, even closer in, provided companionship," he said.

While some dog breeds have ancient histories, 80 per cent are modern varieties that have evolved since the explosion in dog breeding during the Victorian era, Wayne said.

Hello Shelley,

Many thanks for the interesting article from the newspaper with many
new informations for this complicated thematic.


Best regards
Joerg and Yoki

Hello Shelley,

Can you tell me please for my archive the name from the newspaper and the date of the print from the article?

Many thanks for your efforts.

Best regards
Joerg and Yoki