Familial Structure and our dogs

[sweet_ceana]

I've been on a Temple Grandin kick lately and a topic in Animals Make Us Human really got me curious. At one point in the dog section she talks about two different structures for dogs to live in. The first is the dominant and subordinate pack model that we have all been hearing about for a long time. The second is a familial structure that researchers are seeing in wolves in nature. There is no dominance like traditionally thought but Mom, Dad, and kids and sibling relationships.

 

Also, the breeding wolf pair is dominant the same way moms and dads are dominant in human families. A fifty-year-old CEO running a major corporation is not the boss of his mom. Wolf families are the same way. The parents are always the parents, and the pups don't challenge their parents for dominance over the family

 

vs.

 

The reason everyone thought wolves lived in packs led by an alpha is that most research on the social life of wolves has been done on wolves living in captivity, and wolves living in captivity are almost never natural families. They are groups of unrelated animals, put together by humans, that have to come up with some way of dealing with each other. The wolves' solution is a particular form of dominance hierarchy, with one alpha couple who are usually the only wolves allowed to breed. This doesn't happen in the wild because in the wild nobody forces a bunch of unrelated wolves together in a pack.

 

She uses these to models as a way to describe two different ways of living with dogs. Do you feel that your dogs live as a dominance hierarchy or more as a family? I am honestly on the fence on where my dogs would fall. Poke and Ceana interact as siblings, they do not challenge each other in the slightest. Ceana has began to act the same way with Sita. Sita is convinced that both Poke and Ceana are family, but Poke isn't 100% sold on Sita being a sibling quite yet. It may be that he has, but beacuse she is still a puppy I am misenterpreting correction and teaching as dominance.

 

***I know Poke looks at all of our fosters as a dominance hierarchy. He makes it very clear to them that he is in charge and treats them differently than Ceana and Sita. (His different treatment in Sita is what signaled to us that we probably had a foster failure on our hands.) Sita has only been around two other fosters, both of whom she treated as siblings. Ceana's interactions with fosters can be varying, so I am not sure where she stands.

 

For those of you that have actual siblings and parent pup relationships in your household, do you see a difference in the interaction with related dogs and non related dogs? Have you noticed either one of these descriptions fitting litters you have raised? Finally, she goes on to say that some situations dogs need people as and alpha, other situations need people as the parental figure. (This is based on her stance that dogs are permanently juvenile wolves. I don't know much about this topic, only what I have read from Dr. Grandin and Dr. Patricia McConnell so maybe other's might not agree with this statement?) What do you all think about the idea of parent figure vs. alpha pack leader?

 

Thanks for letting me pick your brains. I am excited to read about everyone's thoughts on this.

[JohnLloydJones]

Do you feel that your dogs live as a dominance hierarchy or more as a family?

 

While there is a dominance relationship among dogs (and their humans), the reality is that their social interactions are very fluid. I see that Senneca is dominated by Rhys in the house, but she bullies him without mercy in the dog park. In the back yard, they romp and play more as equals; she uses her speed advantage when they wrestle, but he is enjoying it and lets her roll him without any irritation or aggression. They both look on me as the person in charge -- a bit of leader, parent and ally all rolled into one. They respect me when I lay down rules -- but they are not above trying sneaky things if they think I'm not around, so I make sure they see I am watching when they get a recreational bone or a pig's ear.

 

I don't think the analogy of the 50 yr old CEO and his mom is a good one for dogs, whose nurturing phase is very short compared to humans. I've never had a dog together with his/her pup, so I'd be interested to hear what people who have had that combination have to say.

[geonni banner]

Long. Sorry...

 

I have raised several litters of pups from birth to 8 – 10 weeks up to the age of about six months. Some of them came with their mother; most did not. Most of them were unknown mixed breed or Rough/Smooth Collie crosses. I had one litter of purebred Collies, but I only had them from 4 weeks to 12 weeks.

 

Of the ones that I grew out to 6 mos., they all deferred to their mothers over food, sleeping spots, toys, and other resources. Between them the pack hierarchy was very fluid.

 

There were different personalities, but no clear-cut alpha. Sometimes the most laid-back pup would get tough and snatch a toy or food from the usually more assertive littermates, sometimes the normally less assertive one would drop the object of contention and beat a hasty retreat. The reverse was also true.

 

At one time I had 11 dogs on my property – 4 adult Shelties (2 males, 2 females - all fixed) that belonged to a friend who needed a place to stay for a month or so, my 3 dogs, (a Doberman bitch of 3 years, a Rough Collie bitch of 11 mos., and an Australian Shepherd male of 2 years.) The rescue dogs were a Japanese Chin of 19 years, (with a bad heart) and three adult Collies, all neutered males.

 

For as long as he was with me “Wuffles,” the Japanese Chin was the undisputed alpha dog. He deferred only to me. On thing of great interest to me about their pack dynamics was that if either Wuffles or I ever had to mete out physical corrections, every other dog in the pack would do their best to get a few “licks” in on the dog being corrected. At first I was put off by this “mean, mob mentality,” but after reading extensively on the subject I learned that this was the pack members’ way of reinforcing the alpha dog’s status, thereby avoiding the upheaval and disorder that would accompany the pack squabbling over who was to be the next alpha. This is important for a species descended from cooperative hunters. Wolves in the midst of the confusion of a dominance-hierarchy shift are less successful at hunting, since the individual units of the pack are unsure of who does what and when.

 

But dogs are not wolves. If you subscribe to the theory of neoteny, you will naturally feel that dogs – breeds – that show the greatest evidence of neoteny – puppy-looking breeds like Cocker Spaniels will show less natural development of adult canine “pack etiquette.” They will need considerable guidance in dog-to-dog interactions.

Whereas dogs like the husky breeds, which show fewer juvenile traits in their appearance are naturally more “savvy” when it comes to dog-to-dog relations.

 

My personal experience leads me to conclude that the drop-eared, round-headed dogs are more likely to be people-oriented and view their owners as “parents,” needing more help in learning proper dog/dog social behaviors, whereas the prick-eared, curly-tailed sorts tend to accept their owners as pack leaders if handled sensibly, and have a greater native understanding of dog/dog social dynamics. They also seem to have a keener desire to interact with dogs rather than people.

 

If the contention that herding behavior is modified pack-hunting behavior is true, then I would expect that the Border Collie would be closer to the Husky end of the continuum. I would also think that they would be, as a breed, keener to interact with other dogs than humans. The exception being their owners, which I would expect them to have a “You’re the boss, and I’ve got your back” attitude. That is certainly how my Border Collie behaves. I will leave it to those with more experience with the breed to agree or disagree with my conclusions.

 

Hope this is, in some way, of help.

[MicheleS.]

I have read the Temple Grandin book. A very interesting read.

What I observe in my house with my 2 dogs is that they view me as both parent figure and pack leader. Among themselves, I do see that there is a some 'dominance heirarchy' with Gypsy the older one being the leader. Chase is very respectful of her and doesn't seem bothered one way or another if she gets snarky, he goes his merry way. What I do think I'm seeing is that the longer they are together (Chase will be 2 at the end of this month) there seems to be more of a sibling relationship developing between the 2 of them.

 

With my GSD's, I think they also viewed me as both parent and pack leader. But between the 2 of them, it seemed it was more of a 'dominance heirarchy' relationship and what was really interesting was that I could swear one was the leader/boss while outside in the yard and the other seemed like the leader while inside the house...?

 

No input on parent/pup and siblings since I've never had that.

 

It'll be interesting to hear what others have experienced.

[Root Beer]

Do you feel that your dogs live as a dominance hierarchy or more as a family? I am honestly on the fence on where my dogs would fall. Poke and Ceana interact as siblings, they do not challenge each other in the slightest. Ceana has began to act the same way with Sita. Sita is convinced that both Poke and Ceana are family, but Poke isn't 100% sold on Sita being a sibling quite yet. It may be that he has, but beacuse she is still a puppy I am misenterpreting correction and teaching as dominance.

 

I think that how one views this might depend a lot on what appeals to one personally.

 

First, "dominance" could be described in many different ways. Some would say that any and every attempt to control any aspect of his or her life is "dominance" in a dog. Others would say that only certain attempts to control aspects of his or her life are classified as "dominance". And other would say that only "inappropriate" attempts to control aspects of his or her life are "dominance".

 

So, some would say that if a dog goes out a door ahead of anyone, that's "dominance". Others would say that is not, but that taking possession of a toy and not sharing it with another dog is "dominance". Others would say that neither of those are "dominance", but that jumping up on a person uninvited is "dominance".

 

Add into that, don't members of a family assert some measure of "dominance" over one another? This may or may not be a confrontational thing, but there are aspects of all of our lives that we hold carefully in our own control. So, wouldn't a dog who displays "dominance" in any manifestation also be acting in a familial way, as well? There is, after all, a relational aspect both to "dominance" and "family".

 

I'm not one who buys into "dominance" theory, although of course I recognize that there are certain aspects of my dog's lives that they would rather control. Personally, I don't categorize that as "dominance", but I could if I wanted to. There's the key - I really don't want to. It's too adversarial for my taste. I'm not in a constant power struggle with my dogs, always concerned about dominance and control. That's just not my style. That's not to say my dogs "run the household", as they say, but that it's a give and take. There are ditches to die in and ditches to totally ignore.

 

As far as comparisons between dogs and wolves go, I think that sort of thing is useful to a point. Of course, dogs are not wolves and any similarity between the two needs to be understood in the context of the animals in question.

 

So, that's what I think. Rather rambling, but those are my thoughts.

[SS Cressa]

While I don't have a large pack or much experience. I know Troy and Cressa definitly see me as the parent/leader. ANd I know Cressa at least treats Troy like an annoying but cute kid brother. Troy definitly see Cress as a big sis. It cute watching Troy copy what Cressa does.

[juliepoudrier]

Just a quick note about my parent/siblings experiences--don't have time to read the whole thread or write more right at the moment. I have a mom and two of her pups. Mom is not the top dog in the pack, but when it comes to food, no one is going to get between her and good eats. That is, *except* her son. Pip can (and always has been able to) push his nose right into whatever Twist is eating and she does nothing but share. I can guarantee you that she wouldn't allow the same behavior from her daughter, Pip's littermate. She has always been willing to play with Pip, but has always been rather snarky to Phoebe (off the top of my head, I'd say that evolutionarily, Phoebe would be a rival for breeding rights, and Pip would not).

 

The siblings themselves get along, but are quick to snark at one another when they are excited. Phoebe is very grumbly. She strikes me as the kid who yells "Mooom, he *touched* me," whereas Pip has always been the happy-go-lucky, "I love everyone" type. They have a tendency to bite hocks, on each other and on livestock. Their squabbles turn into fights more quickly than squabbles between unrelated dogs within the pack.

 

That's all I have time for right now--hope it helps answer your question!

 

J.

[MicheleS.]

I believe it's true that how one views 'dominance' is different from one person to another.

I think somehow the word 'dominance' has come to conjure up negative associations, especially when it comes to talking about dog behavior. I personally don't associate any negatives when I use the word to describe my dogs' behavior. They're dogs and they do what they do and I'm pretty sure they're not thinking about the word when behaving in a certain way. And I'm human and need to use an appropriate word as a description.

I could also use the word to describe my relationship with my daughter. As in, I own the house, I pay the bills and she defers to my rules while in my house. It's also a give and take in my relationship with her too. I pick my battles carefully with her. I think I do the same with my dogs depending on the situation so I'm thinking that it's true that my relationship with them is both 'dominant pack leader' and I'm the mommy.

And with each other, the older sibling picks on the younger one

 

Adding to the rambling....

[stockdogranch]

I've got 7 dogs living in the house at the moment, some related. The mother of three pups (one older daughter, 3.5, and a younger daughter and son, both 11 months) is the Queen Mother and is for the most part, a benevolent ruler. She will defer (only slightly) to the 15 year old neutered male, but she definitely is the "alpha bitch" (second to me). The 12 year old neutered male is one of the lower dogs in the pack, as is an 18 month old female who has always been "temporary" (always slated for training then to be sold). The mother's interaction with the two youngest pups is total mom/kids--she's in charge and lets them know it, although she will still initiate play with them. The older daughter is more of an equal--while she will defer to the mother, she can also get away with things no other dog can, like taking a toy away from mom (teasingly) to initiate play. So in my household, it's a hierarchy, but the family relations do play a role,

A

[border_collie_crazy]

I have 7 dogs in my house, all unrelated..and there is a VERY clear heirachy..sort of. basicly there are 2 people in the house, me and my mom, I have 5 dogs and she has 2. my moms dogs are NOT part of my pack..they have nothing to do with eachother, they do not play, they do not hang out, they simpley co-exist.

 

my own pack is clear Dominance, I am Alpha and they are NOT just siblings after that, there is a very clear and very rigid rank, and if anyone steps out of line there WILL be fights. I have to be very serious about my being alpha, because without me, they will all kill eachother(as evidenced by the 31st when they were home with my mom for only 3 hours, and in that 3 hours, Rusty ran away, ladybug and Misty were at eachother throats the whole time and Electra put a hole through Happys leg)..when I am home they dont so much as growl at eachother..in fact they will all curl up on 1 dog bed together. after me Ladybug is #1, and that is the absolute most importent thing that I need to control.

 

my moms pack, Ripley and Perky are more like siblings and my mom is their mommy.

[Shetlander]

While there is a dominance relationship among dogs (and their humans), the reality is that their social interactions are very fluid.

 

I very much agree with this statement. Even when I have a clear "alpha" among my dogs, there is give and take and often the top dog is the most laid back, the least likely to snark or resource guard. I think this comes from confidence and being a true leader. Currently I don't see a clear leader among the dogs. Until Quinn hit around 18 months, the Sheltie did a nice job running her boys. Then Quinn got too rowdy for her to handle. I don't see my dogs as a family, though. They're a pack that I put together. Given their druthers, the Lhasa and Quinn never would have chosen to live together. They're both Alpha wannabes with no clear cut winner, and neither is prone to back down. I do my best to be a strong leader with clear rules and expectations. I'm not one to look at everything in terms of dominance, but I do think as the human in the mix, I need to be in charge, especially when I have two dogs who don't like each other. As long as rules are followed -- the big one in my house being No Resource Guarding-- life is pretty relaxed for all involved. I don't worry about dogs walking ahead of me for instance, Cesar Milan notwithstanding. I do often make Quinn and the Lhasa wait at doors until I release them, but that is because they get too excited and lose their heads by barking stupidly or jostling to get out first which can lead to snarking.

[mum24dog]

Add into that, don't members of a family assert some measure of "dominance" over one another? This may or may not be a confrontational thing, but there are aspects of all of our lives that we hold carefully in our own control. So, wouldn't a dog who displays "dominance" in any manifestation also be acting in a familial way, as well? There is, after all, a relational aspect both to "dominance" and "family".

 

I'm not one who buys into "dominance" theory, although of course I recognize that there are certain aspects of my dog's lives that they would rather control. Personally, I don't categorize that as "dominance", but I could if I wanted to. There's the key - I really don't want to. It's too adversarial for my taste. I'm not in a constant power struggle with my dogs, always concerned about dominance and control. That's just not my style. That's not to say my dogs "run the household", as they say, but that it's a give and take. There are ditches to die in and ditches to totally ignore.

 

Well said.

 

Pam

[Smokjbc]

Hello,

 

We also have 7 dogs, only one mother/daughter combination. Siblings I have had in the past have always gotten along although it seems like one sibling is always "annoying" the other, but the fights are never serious. Our alpha bitch is not especially dominant, she is just the only one of two dogs that doesn't give a $(*%R@ about the other dogs (and in her case, not particularly soft with people) and never submits or does anything but be first to food/water/sleeping spots. Now that she is fifteen, I do have two younger dogs that are starting to cheap-shot her when I don't catch it. She's snarly and mad about it, but also very easy to knock down, but so far she's maintaining her position.

 

 

The rest are mostly fluid, Rhett (also 15) is a very omega dog- she doesn't submit but she doesn't insist either, except for the water dish- that is hers. Rhett is a very serious dog, very rarely plays or acts friendly to other dogs but once or twice a week, she will give her daughter- 10 year old (wow!) Nellie, an ear bath. She never does that with any other dog and Nellie just acts entitled about it. Rhett pretty much gets what she wants as well, Leary and her fight over the choice carpet spot, which is very funny to watch two near-toothless ancient dogs throw down.

 

The two younger males in the house- Brice- 4 year old Border Collie and Wyatt- 7 year old heeler are the worst as far as getting along. When Brice was unneutered, they both went out of their way to antagonize each other, but now that he is fixed, Brice tries to avoid Wyatt, who will strut around and give stink eyes to him. Since they are both Mike's dogs, and both very jealous of him, I think that is their point of contention, not really an alpha setup there either. Most of the dogs don't like Wyatt, because he's a jerk but Jet and Nellie will play with him.

 

Then there is the 80lb Doberman, who is the softie of the house, unless you wake him up while he's sleeping or get in the way of his food dish. Jet, Nellie and Grendal are BFFs and so far get along fantastically, although Jet does guard thresholds with Nellie and we discourage that.

 

So in our "pack" there is no clear leader, or even bottom pile dog- there is alot of jockeying for position, but it's almost always resource/area related, not an over all dominance.

[sweet_ceana]

The main difference I have been reading in responces is between dominance displays and full out coup d'etat.

 

My dogs have dominance displays as well. Poke initiates play by placing his head over Ceana's back , no one takes Ceana's spot (where ever she may be sitting...except for DH and myself) and Ceana and Sita wrestle with each other on their backs. ( Which is quite funny since neither one is in charge they just both default submissive). While the dogs use dominance displays to play and communicate with each other, there is no inkling or urge for any of them to challenge DH and myself or each other for positions. This is what leads me to believe that I am not dealing with that traditional hierarchy. Correct me if I am wrong, but a dominance hierarchy it would seem would always have another member to step up and assume top dog if given the oppertunity. There just aren't any spots between my three. Now with fosters in the house there is a clear order, my three will balance themselves around the new dog(s) accordingly, but on their own I don't see the same types of behaviors.

 

The only challenge I have ever seen, if you could call it that, was Poke at one of our herding lessons. The first time I told him to down he literally back talked me. He barked and grumbled in what I can only assume was "Give me those sheep you #@*! you're screwing it up and it is clear you don't know what you're doing!" I literally stood there and laughed at him. I then told him to down again, he did, and I haven't gotten back talked since.

[BCjetta]

This is a very interesting thread. I've often wondered which, if either, of my dog's is higher up than the other. The BC is mine and she's 11, the aussie is hubby's at he's 5. The aussie always acts dominating, head over her shoulders, pushing her out of the way, stealing toys from her...but, if he's harassing her too much, she'll snap at him and he backs right off and won't even look at her. If she's laying outside the bathroom door and gives him the evil eye (she has some posessive issues with space and me), he will turn away slowly and keep back. If she ever initiates play with him, she is in a very submissive posture - maybe just the way she plays? I've noticed with the aussie...he is posessive of food and toys, however, he will let my BC come up to him with a toy and sniff it or she can grab one end of a stick and they will start to tug. If any other dog, even one he knows, comes near him when he has a toy, he will growl, get all stiff, and try to turn away from them. I hadn't really thought about them both being omega's and being equal in status below us, but I suppose that could be possible as well.

[geonni banner]

I don't think one often sees much in the way of dominance hierarchy in a pack of two. What is interpreted as dominant behavior is often just a tendency to be cranky. In most of the households that I've seen that have two dogs, one of each sex, the male may stick out his chest and strut around under certain circumstances, but if push come to shove he'll usually defer to the bitch. Two females seem to often be in a state of armed truce. More squabbling over resources - especially human attention. The two boy households seem to have the least tension - unless one or both are intact.

 

In a larger group it may be difficult at first to see which is the top dog. True alphas don't have to throw their weight around. they just don't get messed with by other pack members. They are calm, and will often unbend to the extent of soliciting play from a subordinate member by acting "submissive." If they don't, the lower-ranking dog may be reluctant to wrestle or chase in play - and alpha dogs like to play as much as any, so they do what they need to to get a play response from the subordinate dog.

 

Subordinate pack members generally seem happy with their lot. I don't see a lot of scrapping or posturing. I think the individual dog's place is well-advertised by it's scent, and that info is checked and re-checked daily by the pack group butt-sniff. Then when the formalities are dispensed with everybody can just go on being who they are and relax.

 

Sometimes if a group member is removed from the group for a few days, like a bitch being sent away to be bred, there will be tension when she returns. She will literally smell "wrong," and there can be some tough times ahead until everyone is convinced that she is still dominant/ submissive to each of the the other individuals. This is especially true if the alpha dog goes away for awhile. He may have real trouble convincing the others that he is in charge, since his absence will have thrown the pack into disorder. Some of his subordinates may have really enjoyed not deferring to him for a time and may challenge his authority.

 

But all this is watered down with dogs, because the humans in the pack are always the real alphas, or at least they should be! Hierarchical jockeying is less important because all resources are controlled by people. Food, sleeping arrangements, and even breeding rights are arbitrated by humans. So pack hierarchy is subject to veto at any given time. However, with some breeds at least, the wise owners will study pack dynamics in their dogs and reinforce the existing order. Much squabbling and anxiety can be prevented this way.

[Dal & Mad's Mom]

At my home it's hard to detect a Head dog. Only 3 of my dogs can play together at one time. Genie and Maddie cannot play together and infact frequently Maddie makes Gene whine. Otherwise they do everything in a certain order Dally is always first, Genie is next, Sugar 3rd and Maddie takes the rear. Sugar can always eat with Genie and Maddie.

 

At The rescue Pep was always the Boss with Penny as his female counterpart. When he passed Frodo took over and there are occasional Attempts at take overs from Emma and Rhye. They never win.

 

Oddly enough when a new dog arrives they never approach Penny or Frodo with Bad behavior. The most recent example I can give is yesterday. A new dog arrived he was reputed to be a problem at the shelter threatening other dogs and general agressive behavior. For some reason he decided that Old Kim was the dog to Start with (he got a butt whiping). My thought was that he was lucky as Rhye or Frodo would not have stopped at a pin and a growl with a good amt of shaming. Today I heard he's a happy playing dog again.

 

There has to be some communication of the order of things.

[eclare]

I would be curious to hear from folks with experience bringing new adult dogs versus new puppies into their household. If the new dog is quite young is it more likely that a familial relationship will develop? Is the hierarchy automatically established due to age and size? And does it ever change dramatically when the puppy grows up, or is the pup more likely to remain submissive to the older dog for the remainder of life?

[Dal & Mad's Mom]

I would be curious to hear from folks with experience bringing new adult dogs versus new puppies into their household. If the new dog is quite young is it more likely that a familial relationship will develop? Is the hierarchy automatically established due to age and size? And does it ever change dramatically when the puppy grows up, or is the pup more likely to remain submissive to the older dog for the remainder of life?

 

 

I understand that it has to do with respect of who has been there longer. (I heard that here) In my house Genie came in when Dal was nearly 2 and Maddie 1 and of course sugar came with her right away. My guess as to why Genie and maddie cant really establish a clear leader is due to Maddies age when Genie came as an adult. Like I said they all seem to defer to Dally.

 

It has to be true as Pep was so old and had cancer when the rescue started yet he was given a top status. Penny reinforced his status as leader. She would often do all the disipline in his place and keep him in the backround. Frodo and Penny came in together pre rescue and now they are the top dogs.

 

I should also add interestingly the only dog that has ever come in and seriously challenged the friends of Pep order was The red dog with all the knots on her back from swaffords. She came in with such a power air about her and she took one look at Penny and tried to make a change.

[border_collie_crazy]

I would be curious to hear from folks with experience bringing new adult dogs versus new puppies into their household. If the new dog is quite young is it more likely that a familial relationship will develop? Is the hierarchy automatically established due to age and size? And does it ever change dramatically when the puppy grows up, or is the pup more likely to remain submissive to the older dog for the remainder of life?

 

my most tyranical dominant dog(Misty) was my 5th dog and added as a puppy, she marched in and took the pack over from the previous leader before she was even 1 year old. Ladybug was added most recently and an older adult rescue..she is now at the top. Happy and Perky have been in my house the longest, both are near the bottom..although Happy is rising now that she is 9 lol. Electra and Rusty dont seem to be domninat over one another..they are my only dogs who are actual pals..Electra actually gets very upset without Rusty. I have had Electra since she was 6 months old..Rusty was added as a 4 year old 6 months later. not one of my dogs that was raised together get along together on there own.