I wasn't sure whether to do this as a blog or discussion, but I am hoping some other people will throw in their two cents, so I chose a discussion.

I was on my way home from work the other day and heard the beginning of a story about the loss of the Druid Wolf Pack in Yellowstone. Missing the end, I went online to find more info, since wolves fascinate me.

And the more I learn, the less faith I have in "pack theory" of dog behavior. I think most of us have heard it. Trainers like Cesar Milan (who I do respect) rely on it heavily. The idea is that in a pack, there is a strict structure, and if you behave as the "alpha dog," many of your doggy problems will disappear.

It all makes sense, til I learned that most of the studies of wolves that pack theory are based on were done with captive populations, not wild ones. Turns out that in the wild, a wolf "pack" is most often a breeding pair and their young adult offspring (up to around 2 years old). There are exceptions, and sometimes unrelated adults join, but most often that is not the case. And unlike social prey animals, like horses, the majority of wolves don't stay in a band of unrelated animals. They go off and start their own breeding pair pack. So in many cases, the "alpha" is actually the parent and it's not really natural to have mature adults staying in a submissive role.

The other big thing about pack theory is that wolves (and therefore, theoretically, dogs) respect the established order and the underlings rarely challenge the authority of the alpha to choose resting spaces, food, etc.

In reading about the Druid Pack, many of my ideas of pack theory were challenged. Here's a great link:

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episodes/in-the-valley-of-the-wolves...

Some excerpts of things that surprised me:

By the end of 1998, the Lamar Valley Druids had seven members, and a growing reputation for conflict. The constant harassment of beta female #42 by her sister, #40, earned #42 the nickname “Cinderella” by the Yellowstone researchers. The put-upon Cinderella created a den and gave birth to pups in 1998, but none survived; the following year #40 attacked #42 in her den, and she again produced no offspring.

Cinderella finally reached the ball in 2000, after a violent turn of events that put her at the head of the pack. She and the other female members of the pack, perhaps tired of #40’s iron-pawed leadership, turned on the alpha female, and killed her.

So much for the idea that the subordinates will respect the pack leader.

The pack expanded to 17 members by the end of 2003, aided by the arrival of a lone black male, #302, formerly of the Leopold pack. #302 may have fathered all of the pups not born to the alpha female. To wolf researchers, he was “Casanova” — a lover, not a fighter, who wooed the females in the group while staying appropriately submissive to alpha male, #21.

Well, apparently alpha males don't even always control breeding rights. Hmmm. This is not what I'd been led to believe at all!

I'd also learned that alphas control the food, but from another study:

http://www.mnforsustain.org/wolf_mech_dominance_alpha_status.htm

Aside from these food deliveries, there appeared to be an ownership zone (Mech 1970) around the mouth of each wolf, and regardless of the rank of a challenger, the owner tried to retain the food it possessed, as Lockwood (1979) also found with captive wolves. Wolves of any rank could try to steal food from another of any rank, but every wolf defended its food (Table 6). Generally, dominant wolves seemed to succeed more at stealing food, but sample size was too small for a definite conclusion to be drawn.

Ok, so even if my dog knows I'm dominant, it apparently won't help with food-guarding. It does help with who gets to eat at all if food is scarce, though:

As for high-ranking animals asserting any practical control over subordinates, the nature of the interaction is highly conditional. For example, with large prey such as adult moose (Alces alces), pack members of all ranks (ages) gather around a carcass and feed simultaneously, with no rank privilege apparent (Mech 1966; Haber 1977); however, if the prey is smaller, like a musk ox calf, dominant animals (breeders) may feed first and control when subordinates feed (Mech 1988; National Geographic 1988).

Don't get me wrong, it's not that the study of wolf behavior has no significance. It does seem, though, that as more is learned, perhaps not as much is applicable to dealing with our dogs as I once imagined. The more I think about it the more I think that classical and operant conditioning are the biggest things I use in training my dogs: they are rewarded for desired behaviors, and ignored or (rarely) punished for undesired behaviors. That increases the frequency of the behaviors I like and decreases the frequency of the behaviors I dislike. Even in multi-dog homes, the state of having unrelated sexually mature adults forced to live together and accept subordinate roles does not seem to be the natural order of things, and as the Druid pack exemplifies, in larger packs where resources are abundant and that happens, violence and upheaval seems to follow if the animals are left to their own devices.

And what became of the Druid pack? It appears they have come to a bad end; the natural life of canines is violent and short:

http://www.sltrib.com/nationworld/ci_14633522

The pack numbered 11 wolves two months ago, but officials say the alpha female and other members were killed by other packs, the alpha male wandered off, and a skin infection called mange killed others. "They're down to one and that one probably won't make it through the winter," said Doug Smith, Yellowstone's wolf biologist.

According to the NPR story I heard, the remaining female is half-bald from severe mange and likely won't survive. I know there are a lot of sources out there that romanticize the "natural" lifestyle of canines and talk about how our modern lifestyle is the cause of all sorts of problems. In some cases that may be true, but the fact is that the life of a wild canine is riddled with disease and danger.

What do you think? Is wolf pack theory the model you use in your home for your dogs? Or do you rely more on modern reward-based training styles? Or maybe a bit of both?