Oh, this thread is getting interesting!

One thing is, you can't ignore facts and evidence. Most trainers have gone through the recent change evidence.

For anyone who wants to know the latest evidence, look at the Coppinger book! Or there is a good two part documentary on satalite channel Eden.

You're kidding right? Well, let me put it this way. It's the responsibilities as (one of the) head(s) of the household! Otherwise, why on earth am I going to work tonight instead of saying stuff it all and going surfing for the rest of my life!

I don't give a monkey's for fashionable scientific research. I go with what I see working with my own eyes. That is the wisdom that dogs and humans have the relationship they do because the structure of their family/pack is so similar. I seem to recall I did a blog entry on this topic the last time it was being debated. You'll note if you find my post that my position has not changed. I've seen no evidence to make me alter my opinion & I'm still Jake's provider/protector/leader. In fact I'm probably his best mate at the moment because I just fed him. I'm pretty certain I can attribute such concepts to him as I also believe that he's not as much of a dumb animal as some appear to think and does 'appreciate' these things in his way.

well no...

Ok I can see where you're going, but what has any of that got to do with the supposed title of pack leader? You are a human and go out and work and shop; that's what we do.
Do you feel you are pack leader over your children (sorry, if you have any?). If you shared a flat with people, would you still be pack leader if you went out and worked/shopped? what if the others also work and shop? What if you all pay rent? I'm just tossing out a few thoughts.

Being "holder of the resources" is great for training but when you refer to pack leader, you are referrring to hierarchy gained often by physical means. That is what pack leader originally meant .

It's not about being fashionable, it's about finding out more about animals.
Scientists admit they get thing wrong sometimes. Including some of those who once agreed with pack leadership!

Family - yes, I'd agree we are more like family; this is what is being suggested more now, that dogs do live as families do

I don't think anyone would argue with the first 2 ..

At the end of the day we are all entitled to believe what we want, and I wouldn't bother debating it too much with peeps who are firm in their beliefs supporting pack theory and dominance, as it's not worth the time. But, I think it's always good to be open minded and to find out about things - then, if we disagreewith those things, fine. Up to the individual always as to what they prefer to do, at the end of the day...

Wys
x

Oh, I think I get it! We all think pretty much the same thing, it's just definitions that are getting in the way! Good. Right. Problem solved, case closed.

Yup thats pretty much what I figured out with most of these threads.

In reality it dosent matter to the dog whether we thing we are Alpha, leader, boss, parent, guide, friend, provider, owner or mummy/daddy
Just so long as we give them a secure life, food, shelter, love and consistant fair training

The problems in these debates tend to rise because the 'pack leader' training methods that have been developed and used as an excuse for unfair heavy handed training methods - which I dont think anyone on here uses

and the belief often arrises on the other side of these debates that if you are not being the 'boss' then you are permissive, no rules, dressing your little furperson in daft outfits, stuffing treats in their mouths while begging them to be good

I think in reality we all fall somewhere in the middle

You are not a pack leader in the traditional sense. Dominance is a relationship based on the control of resources - mainly food and sex. I suspect Jake has no desire to have (reproductive)sex with you or Mrs. C. and he is well fed. Studies in captive animals show that when food is plentiful, there are very few competitive conflicts.

More importantly, even among feral dog groups the females will mate with any available male - another clue that dogs don't have this structure hierarchy that people imagine. IN other species, the male resource guards the females

More accurately; it won't alter your perception of what really happens.

Funny, because according the the proponents of this type of outdated thinking, the leader would never give food to the followers. After all the main benefits of being the "alpha" is getting food and sex.

I make him wait for permission to start eating. I always make him sit while I put the bowl down, then tell him 'go on then!' That's a pretty powerful position to be in, I'd have thought, similar to an alpha eating what he wants and then allowing subordinates to feed.

That only happens in your imagination. There is well documented evidence that wolves and dogs that would traditionally be described as submissive will warn off the Alphas when they have an item they value be it toy or food.