Dog Behavior Myths

Found this today and found it to be a good quick read and summarizes some canine behavioral myths that continue to be dominant despite the fact that they arent based on anything solid.

http://www.dogsincanada.com/fairy-tales-the-top-10-dog-behaviour-myths

Enjoy.

Edit by steve : i just added the link back

Very interesting, and I know I'm not an expert but I don't agree with all

There are stages of dog warnings. Dogs dont go from calm to biting - they have steps in between to warn whoever or whatever is around them. Stop it, I dont like that. If you take away a dogs tools and ability to warn then that leads to "unprovoked" bites.

In news papers you hear about dog attacks and how "the dog gave no warnings. Good dog, out of no where attacked" - it wasnt out of no where. The dog gave warnings. But some people punish the dog for those warnings. Now you have the perfect storm for being in that news paper.

The better choice isnt to punish the dog for being nervous - it's telling you it is nervous. Dont punish that. instead use positive training to make them okay with whatever it is they are afraid of. My girl, Violet, is dog reactive. I don't punish her when she growls at a dog when we are walking. Instead she gets cookies and praise when we see a dog. Now when she sees a dog she looks at me and wags her tail for a cookie. Positive conditioning and training.

I must admit it's a bit simplistic. Maybe there's more to it than that, but there's a couple of things I don't agree with - especially no. 7! But also no.1. Dogs, generally, ARE pack animals & the ones that are loners are the exceptions.

Dogs are not wolves - they dont form social structures like wolves do. Yes the article is simplistic. Each myth it talks about is only a paragraph long. There are whole long studies and books that go much more into these little tidbits than this article does

Nichole wrote:There are stages of dog warnings. Dogs dont go from calm to biting - they have steps in between to warn whoever or whatever is around them. Stop it, I dont like that. If you take away a dogs tools and ability to warn then that leads to "unprovoked" bites.

I agree that there are stages of warnings, running from backing away through growling to biting. However, if a child has been brought up to treat a dog proerly & the dog still growls, then it cannot be allowed to get away with it. By all means train the dog to cope with situations & train the child to treat a dog properly, but you cannot allow a dog to growl at a child.

Nichole wrote:Dogs are not wolves - they dont form social structures like wolves do. Yes the article is simplistic. Each myth it talks about is only a paragraph long. There are whole long studies and books that go much more into these little tidbits than this article does

I know dogs are not wolves. I know that they are far removed from wolves. However, their closest wild ancestor is the wolf & many of their behavioural traits are the same or very similar.

Next time you see a group of dogs together, say over the park, watch what they do. They will automatically form a 'pack' and will exhibit pack behaviour, including a hierarchy.

If you are suggesting a dog should not get away with growling then you are suggesting punishing it in some fashion, correct? Even if you punish it by sending it off into another room it has gotten what it wants - to be away from that kid. Another way that can turn on you is "I see that kid and I get shoved into this room by myself. I dont like that kid" and the bad behavior is solidified even further.

Instead I'd suggest a different way of looking at it. As the child approaches you say "Oh what a GOOD DOG!! You see that little girl and you dont care! YAY PUPPY! OMG you are such a good dog!" and while you are doing that you give it some yummy cookies. Then they see that child and think "wow, I get so much love and yumyums and warm fuzzy feelings when I see that kid. I like that kid!!! YAY KID!!"

It isnt an overnight fix, but neither is any behavioral problem.

we will just have to agree to disagree on the pack thing

I understand where your coming from but if the dog is already growling I personally dont think treating it is the way to go. I dont have to send mine in another room etc she understands the word 'naughty' and stops whatever it is she souldnt be doing, although I dont think I've ever heard her growl.

So you totally ignore the fact that a dog has growled at a child, even if that growl was unprovoked? Would you therefore wait until the next time to say "Yay, look a lovely child" etc etc, and risk the dog going one stage further?

I wouldn't.

I think a lot of the new methods of assessing dog behaviour are based far too much on 'human reasoning'. Dogs do not think or act like humans & should not be evaluated in the same way.

Are you saying that dogs are NOT in any way pack animals? That they will not form packs given the chance?

I'm not recommending treating the dog for growling. That would teach the dog that growling at the child is a good thing. They only treat when they do good things. - not growling or maybe letting the dog get pet by the kid. Or kissing the kid! Never for growling. The above behavioral modifications have to be done before they tip over into the warning stage.

With Vi and her DA issues if she reacts we take a few steps back and try again. We had to work slowly keeping the dogs at a safe distance and now we can pass a dog about 4 feet away no problem. Any time she reacts its like taking another step backwards in the process which required us to go slow.

I hope that makes sense.

Caryll wrote:So you totally ignore the fact that a dog has growled at a child, even if that growl was unprovoked? Would you therefore wait until the next time to say "Yay, look a lovely child" etc etc, and risk the dog going one stage further?

I wouldn't.

I think a lot of the new methods of assessing dog behaviour are based far too much on 'human reasoning'. Dogs do not think or act like humans & should not be evaluated in the same way.

Are you saying that dogs are NOT in any way pack animals? That they will not form packs given the chance?

This article summarizes what I have come to believe in regards to dogs and the pack theory.
http://www.jeandonaldson.com/jeans-blog-mainmenu-51/64-are-dogs-pack-animals
I used to be a believer in the pack mentality, alpha rolls, etc. I recognize a lot of these theories can be hot topics because they have been preached & practiced for so long.

If it were my dog with a kid I would look at what is going on to provoke and growl.How you would deal with it depends on why the dog growled. let's pretend the dog thought the child was too close - doesnt like kids to get closer than 4 feet. I would move the dog 5 feet (assuming that was far enough to get him to calm down) and once he flopped down and ignored the kid I would praise and treat. You are praising and treating the dog for being in the presence of the kid and not reacting negatively. Then SLOWLY I would decrease this space. Stick with 5 feet for a while, then 4 feet, then 3 feet - all the while praise/treats for NOT reacting. If the dog reacted I would take it back a step and start over and probably go slower.

Nichole wrote:I'm not recommending treating the dog for growling. That would teach the dog that growling at the child is a good thing. They only treat when they do good things. - not growling or maybe letting the dog get pet by the kid. Or kissing the kid! Never for growling. The above behavioral modifications have to be done before they tip over into the warning stage.

With Vi and her DA issues if she reacts we take a few steps back and try again. We had to work slowly keeping the dogs at a safe distance and now we can pass a dog about 4 feet away no problem. Any time she reacts its like taking another step backwards in the process which required us to go slow.

I hope that makes sense.

Yes, it makes sense, but what would you do if your dog growled, unprovoked, at a child? Ignore it? Bad mistake in my view. Take it away without telling it 'no'? Again, bad mistake - the dog will not have learnt that the behaviour is wrong. Dogs cannot reason that if they do something that is not rewarded it must be wrong - it doesn't work that way.

Shane wrote:well in my book if ant dog growls at a child or baby it should be punished straight away no praised for their actions,

Again - You praise for their good actions not their bad. NEVER praise/treat a bad reaction!

Caryll wrote:
Yes, it makes sense, but what would you do if your dog growled, unprovoked, at a child? Ignore it? Bad mistake in my view. Take it away without telling it 'no'? Again, bad mistake - the dog will not have learnt that the behaviour is wrong. Dogs cannot reason that if they do something that is not rewarded it must be wrong - it doesn't work that way.

I've already said above what I would do if my dog growled at a child.
The fact remains that if you tell a dog NO and punish it, it will associate jr with bad negative thoughts. They dont have reasoning abilities like humans and you cannot explain to them what they are doing is wrong. further, if you take away its ability to warn, it is more likely to move on to the next step which is a bite.

No, you've said what you would do next time. What would you do about the original behaviour?

Nichole wrote:

If it were my dog with a kid I would look at what is going on to provoke and growl.How you would deal with it depends on why the dog growled. let's pretend the dog thought the child was too close - doesnt like kids to get closer than 4 feet. I would move the dog 5 feet (assuming that was far enough to get him to calm down) and once he flopped down and ignored the kid I would praise and treat. You are praising and treating the dog for being in the presence of the kid and not reacting negatively. Then SLOWLY I would decrease this space. Stick with 5 feet for a while, then 4 feet, then 3 feet - all the while praise/treats for NOT reacting. If the dog reacted I would take it back a step and start over and probably go slower.

RIGHT THEN I would remove the dog 5 feet away and begin conditioning.

But how do you know it has growled because the child is too close? Maybe it doesn't like the child's voice, or the way it moves, or the fact that it has sweets that the dog wants - the list goes on. I just don't see how you can ignore what could possibly be a dangerous behaviour. By all means try to find out what caused it, but by allowing the behaviour you are reinforcing it.

In the above scenario I said " let's pretend the dog thought the child was too close" so that is the example I used to illustrate how positive reinforcement and conditioning would work. We can do more examples if you like. Some are trickier than others. The reason we do these things and put more work into it is because the alternative (removing the warning) is not a risk I am willing to take.

ETA - growling is not dangerous. It's a warning. removing the warning is dangerous.

If you dont agree, we will just have to nicely and politely agree to disagree.

Alright. Scenario,

Dog growls at child. You have no idea why the dog ahs growled - non at all. The child is playing on the floor, ignoring the dog & doing no harm.

What do you do? Move it a couple of feet away and hope that was the reason?

As a mother of 3, there'd be big trouble if my boy growled at them, especially because my children have been raised with dogs since they were babies and know how to behave around them and when to back off and give the dog space if necessary. In my opinion, it is never ok for a dog to growl at a child unless that child is really provoking the dog, in which case the dog would still be told off and removed to another room because its unacceptable. The only time I'd make allowances for my boy, is if a child was physically annoying him, like smacking him. As for pack mentality, dogs always need to know where they are in your pack, and that you're the leader, otherwise trouble will start.

What is the dog looking at? Is it looking at the child? Or is it looking at the scary shadow that moved (mouse) under the chair? Is this a dog that knows and loves this child for 5 years or is this a new rescue whose history you dont know? Has this dog shown this behavior before?

If there are clear signs that the dog is not growling at the child but at something else bothering him, then naturally he wouldnt be punished. But if its clear that he is growling at the child or I'm 99% sure he growled at the child, he'd be told off and removed from the room. Prevention is better than cure, better safe than sorry.

OK, it's a dog you've had for a while - maybe 6 months or more. No previous behaviour & is looking directly at the child. Dog & child have previously been fine together & there is nothing medically wrong with the dog.

(I accept that if a child is teasing a dog or if the dog is feeling unwell it may happen, and although I would still be firm (a loud "No!" & removal from the child) I would understand & would try to prevent the occasion happening again.)

I'm sitting here trying to think of a way to explain what I'm trying to say.

A dog growls at a child because it doesnt like children (makes him nervous. Maybe a child sat on him as a pup or something). You punish that behavior and he doesnt do that behavior anymore. Is that a success? Is he suddenly not feeling nervous around that kid anymore? Or is he still feeling nervous but now we cant tell you he's nervous?

Another way to look at this, is if a dog is nervous and tells the child he's nervous through growling then that child will more likely stay the heck away from that dog. That doesnt fix the problem with the dog and that dog still needs to be conditiioned to not be nervous around kids, but in the mean time he said "Hey kid, you make me nervous. Keep your distance, K?" - pretty much guaranteed to not result in a dog bite.

The myth also states that growling leads to aggression. The growling is just a warning. If you remove the warning the kid wont know the dog is nervous. This can lead to bad things. Again, this doesnt fix the dogs nervousness and is still something that needs to be trained and conditioned away,

Real life situation. My husband went to pet a strange dog tied up on a street post (why? not very smart. I gave him heck for that). The dog growled. Did rob listen? NO! He tried to get a little closer and the dog snapped (the step before a bite). THEN he listened! The more warnings you take away the less warnings they can give to tell someone how nervous and scared they are.

I didnt post this to get into a huge debate. I fully recognize people dont agree with everything I have said and that's fine. I'm not on a mission to change anyones mind. I'm just trying to explain some of the questions you guys have had.

Its good to hear all opinions, christ it would be a dull world if we all thought the same! I can understand what your getting at but its not a way I personally think or would train.

Nichole wrote:A dog growls at a child because it doesnt like children (makes him nervous. Maybe a child sat on him as a pup or something). You punish that behavior and he doesnt do that behavior anymore. Is that a success? Is he suddenly not feeling nervous around that kid anymore? Or is he still feeling nervous but now we cant tell you he's nervous?

I

I'm not saying you are wrong, and I'm not going to take this any further, but what I'm trying to say is, of course you try to find out why the dog growled, & then address that problem in the way you sugest, but I think that the original behaviour must not just be ignored.

End of my rant!! Sorry for hi-jacking the topic!!

If the dog has been just fine and best friends with that kid for 6 months then I would look a what the kid is doing (assuming the dog is directing its anxiety and worry towards the kids direction). Dogs are funny critters and some dogs get spooked by funny things. It may be as simple as the crayons the kid is using to color with.

Just yesterday I brought home a little piece of cute metal art that says "welcome" on it (it's meant to be set by your front door or somethign similar) and the whole piece is shaped like an animal. It has coils where the animals 'joints' are, like the tail for example, so if you hit it the thing jiggles alittle.That thing spooked the heck out of Violet. Very random. She barked and growled at that thing and if looks could kill that thing would be dust. once on a walk Sadie's hackles went up and she growled and barked (she was VERY alarmed) and her attention was directed right at a clear plastic bag with an old comforter in it. We ended up needing to give that thing a 10 foot distance so we could keep walking she was so scared of it. When I tried to step closer to it to see what had her so scared she FREAKED out like it was going to eat me or something.

Ok ok back to the problem at hand. I dont think it would be the kid. I could be wrong, but I would assume it was something else. Crayons, or maybe the mouse hiding under the couch directly behind her. I'd probably ask the kid to move over to the other side of the room and see if the attention stayed on them even after the move. If it did I'd continue looking at the kid. New bow? New shampoo?? I would find that very peculiar that the dog woke up one day and just decided out of the blue it didnt like the kid so I'd be ruling out everything else first.

I admit I'd probably wonder if the kid did someting when I (the adult) wasnt looking. Personally since I dont believe in punishing a dog for giving a warning I'd probably do something to distract the dog, like a walk or a chew toy. There are lots of directions this possible scenario could go.

Agree to disagree?

Caryll wrote:Agree to disagree?

You bet honey.
cheers till the next debate! *hat tip*

If I have ignored my dogs signals long enough that an actual bite has occurred then I have failed my dog as an owner. Dogs dont just bite. There are signals. If you remove the signals, all that is left is the bite.

If my dog bit a child I would have to seriously question whether or not my dog can ever be around kids, period. I would take my dog to the vet and make sure there isnt a medical reason for the out burst. I would also pursue a professional opinion from someone who deals with things like this for a living (like a certified dog trainer) and have them help me assess the situation.

I can handle warnings, but I have never had to face owning a dog who bites. If I ever cross that bridge I would do the above. If the dog is not trust worthy around other people, hard decisions would have to be made.

I have read this theory before about not punishing for displaying warning signs like the growl. I think it was thought up by Jan Fennell. British lady who has won best of breeds at cruffs.

Yeah I don't agree with number 7 either. Like Shane pointed out there is edvidence in the streets of Mexico and India that shows dogs form packs.
You will probably know more on this story Nicole. I heard that when hurrican katrina happened, some pets were seperated from their owners. Apparently when rescue workers went in 24 hours after the hurricain the dogs had already formed packs and these packs involved dogs carrying out the alpha behaviour.

I posted a link earlier in the discussion that talks about the pack theory thingy - goes into the mexican dogs too. When pups get thrown into the wild-environment like that there is a lotof squabbling over resources, etc. Strongest dog wins, but they arent working together as a pack (wolf pack team work). Definitely some pecking order going on though. Loser doesnt get dinner

we will just have to agree to disagree on what domestic does are really doing in a wild setting.

If you want to have the last word in here, fine. Have it if that will make you feel better about your beliefs.

As I said before - agree to disagree. I'm not going to respond to you in this thread again.

Nichole wrote:. Strongest dog wins, but they arent working together as a pack (wolf pack team work). Definitely some pecking order going on though. Loser doesnt get dinner

Im not having a go, don't be so defensive I found it an interesting read, just that I don't agree with a few.
I believe that dogs like us will always ask the question "Whats in it for me?
If you say that they have formed packs in Mexico but don't work as one, why would the weaker one, help hunt for food that's it's never going to taste? What's in it for them? Like any living creature it has the desire to survive. If it doesn't get to eat it doesn't survive. It will just wonder off and try and join a pack that does allow it too eat for it's work and troubles. I don't believe for one min their are dogs in a pack like structure that are working as in helping to gain foor for others without being able to eat themselves. What's the point of that?

I'm sorry I didn't think my response to you was defensive. The link I posted earlier does a much better job of explaining the dog-pack theory than I do which is why i posted it. Beyond that, I'm obviously not going to change any minds about it which is fine. I'm not exactly on a mission to do so. Definitely makes for lively conversation though!

oh good got the impression you were a bit upset. Yeah I agree it's certainly got a few posting lol
I've read the post but still disagree.
Obviously you haven't wrote the atricles yourself, what are your beliefs on the matter, is there any you disagree with?

Nah I didn't write the article and I don't have access to the studies that are quoted in a few articles I have read on the topic which is a shame because otherwise we're just posting internet articles back and forth at each other. Times like this I wish I was still at a university so I could have access to all those studies.

My beliefs are that the scientific community, as well as the rest of the dog community, believed that dogs are pack animals like wolves because they are genetically identical. But there have been some studies done on domestic does that go "wild" (like in Romania where that village was destroyed leaving the dogs to fend for themselves) and they didnt form a pack like everyone was expecting.

But I guess this depends on what your definition of a "pack" is. My definition of a pack is what the wolves do. A family of dogs. A mated pair and their offspring. The male and older children hunt for the family while mom and/or older littermates babysit the pups. Once the pups are of mature age they break off to find some land, find a mate and start their own pack. A family unit that works together to raise the off spring.

They dont avoid each other like the plague. They are known to work together.
"Their associations with one another are brief and casual: a couple of dogs may hang out together temporarily and then part company. Dogs are often drawn together by a scarce resource like a food source or estrous female but once this magnet is gone, they go their separate ways." (from the article. I'm lazy)

ye i can see the term pack can be seen in differant ways pack and grouping together are two totally differant things

I think one small difference between the 2 would be
5 dogs together only 4 eat = group?
5 dogs together all 5 eat = pack?

Why would the dog that doesn't eat stay with the "group" he won't cos he will end up dead, resulting in 4 dogs in the group.
I just feel that the studies can't of been carried out long enough. Due to the small fact that it would be the same dog being the weaker one every day and not getting to eat. Resulting in that dog getting weaker and weaker, resulting in 4 dogs, then 3, then 2 then 1. So unless they are living in groups of 1, their living in a pack.
Thats the way I see it anyway.

In my view pack order exists in multiple dog households. i have 3 dogs here, a dog, a bitch and her daughter. i have a bench in back garden the dog and bitch like to sit on and soak up the sun on, i have never seen her daughter sitting on the bench and she is over 3 years old. Her sister, who we unfortunately lost at a young age sat on the bench as soon as she could hop on it. Regarding a stafford growling at a child, one way trip to vets only option!