My Philosophy

Contrary to popular thinking, research studies of wolves in their natural habitat demonstrate that wolves are not dominated by an "Alpha Wolf" that is the most aggressive male, or male-female pairing, of the pack. Rather, they have found that wolf packs are very similar to how human families are organised, and there is little aggression or fights for "dominance." Wolves, whether it be the parents or the cubs of a pack, depend on each other to survive in the wild; consequently wolves that engage in aggressive behaviours toward each other would inhibit the pack's ability to survive and flourish. While social hierarchies do exist (just as they do among human families) they are not related to aggression in the way it is commonly portrayed (incorrectly) in popular culture. As Senior Research Scientist L. David Mech recently wrote regarding his many years of study of wolves, we should "once and for all end the outmoded view of the wolf pack as an aggressive assortment of wolves consistently competing with each other to take over the pack." (Mech, 2008) In addition to our new understanding of wolf behaviour, study into canine behaviour has found that dogs, while sharing some traits with their wolf cousins, have many more significant differences. As a result, the idea that dog behaviour can be explained through the application of wolf behaviour models is no more relevant than suggesting that chimpanzee behaviour can be used to explain human behaviour. 

The dog evolved in the company of humans and cannot exist without them. Even the vast majority living “wild” as village scavengers depend on proximity to humans. That relationship has become so intimate that dogs are often viewed as creatures apart.  Biologist James Serpell writes; “The domestic dog exists precariously in the no-man’s-land between the human and non human . . . neither person nor beast.” It is nonsensical to think of dogs dominating that which they rely on to survive.

Unfortunately, this idea that dogs are basically "domesticated wolves" living in our homes still persists among dog trainers and behaviour counsellors, as well as breeders, owners, and the media.

One of the biggest misconceptions we find ourselves faced with is the definition of "dominance." Dogs are often described as being "dominant" which is an incorrect usage of the term. Dominance is not a personality trait. Dominance is "primarily a descriptive term for relationships between pairs of individuals." and moreover, "the use of the expression 'dominant dog' is meaningless, since "dominance" can apply only to a relationship between individuals. (Bradshaw et al., 2009) Dominance comes into play in a relationship between members of the same species when one individual wants to have the first pick of available resources such as food, beds, toys, bones, etc. Even between dogs, however, it is not achieved through force or coercion but through one member of the relationship deferring to the other peacefully. In many households the status of one dog over another is fluid; in other words, one dog may be the first to take his pick of toys, but will defer to the other dog when it comes to choice of resting places. Dogs that use aggression to "get what they want" are not displaying dominance, but rather anxiety-based behaviours, which will only increase if they are faced with verbal and/or physical threats from their human owners. Basing one's interaction with their dog on dominance is harmful to the dog-human relationship and leads to further stress, anxiety and aggression from the dog, as well as fear and antipathy of the owner.

Here's where you can enter in text. Feel free to edit, move, delete or add a different page element.