Skip to main content
Topic: Dobermans (Read 14752 times) previous topic - next topic
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Dobermans

Reply #15
Every owner of a dog that has hurt or killed a child says it was out of their dog's character. Like DJC said you just need the dog to bark not rip the intruder's throat out.

I have only ever had border collies who are the most intelligent dogs in the world but are high energy so you need to have kids.

Agreed, any dog that can stand on the ground and look a kid square and fair in the eyes is a risk. Dogs have only one way to express displeasure in something and it involves teeth. Secondly, the best dog in the world can have a bad day, a headache, a bruise, some pain, the sh1ts up! Large dogs should not be left in the custody of small children, full stop!

I had a friend who had two Rotties, raised together under identical circumstances. One developed a personality disorder and had to be put down. Basically as soon as the owner left the house the dog decided it was boss and would growl and snarl at the wife and kids if they tried to get it off the coach or out of the house. Not something you want from a dog that's taller than the rest of your family.
The Force Awakens!

Re: Dobermans

Reply #16
People need to understand that larger Dogs like German Shepherds, Rotties, Dobermans etc are dominant breed dogs and function in a  pecking order system within the family and with outsiders. When you train them they have to adopt a position in the family and that has to always be at the bottom of the tree if you want full obedience....a dominant breed dog will assume the No 2 position in the household to the master if left to its own devices..that cant happen when you have children.

When you eyeball a German Shepherd you issue a challenge to its dominance, when my family eyeball our dog, speak firmly  she knows whose boss and drops her gaze, wags her tail and looks for a command, when a stranger eyeballs her or another dominant breed does similar she stands her ground and wont tolerate any threatening behaviour...thats how they operate and you cant leave non family members/strangers with dominant breed dogs alone.

Larger Dogs are for adult families....they present a risk for small children. trained or untrained, when in doubt and it doesnt matter how clever they are they will revert to their natural behaviour which wont include many warnings like barking...larger dogs tend to attack first with a throaty growl and save the barking for later and thats why they are more dangerous especially for strangers. small children etc...







Re: Dobermans

Reply #17
All this stuff about pecking order, alphas, and pack hierarchy is a bit passé.  It emanated from the 70s when a biologist observed wolves which were in captivity in a wildlife refuge.  As wolves made themselves scarce when humans went into the wild, this was a rare opportunity.  What this guy saw was that the wolves acted like hardened prisoners.  They fought each other to be boss and the boss had to withstand constant challenges.  This researcher then theorised that dogs operated in the same way as they were, after all, descended from wolves.  Back then, domestic animals such as dogs and cats weren't considered to be worthy of study, so this theory wasn't challenged.  Dog trainers were happy with this 'pack leader' theory as it merely validated their way of doing their thing - using harsh discipline to show the dogs who is boss.

In fact, the behaviour of the wolves wasn't reflective of their behaviour in the wild let alone how dogs behave.  In the wild, wolves live in family units.  Neither the father nor the mother is the 'alpha'.  They lead most of the time because they have the experience but the young wolves will take the lead on occasions if they're the best hunters, etc.. There was no 'alpha' in the sense of dominating access to resources (food, shelter, sex) with the others taking turns after the alpha was finished according to the hierarchy.  Quite the contrary - the parents provided for their progeny.  The wolves in the refuge were males who weren't related but were forced to share limited space and resources.

Researchers have noted that packs of stray dogs just don't form stable hierarchies and there is no domination of resources.

Dogs have been domesticated for millenia.  The process of domestication has changed dogs massively.  Selective breeding took wolves that were unusually friendly towards humans and reinforced this quality.  A Russian researcher showed how this process would have worked by running a breeding program with Silver Foxes over 40 generations.  Silver Foxes are extremely avoidant of contact with humans in the wild but he ended up with foxes which had radically changed in looks and behaviour.  Not only did the foxes end up craving contact with humans but also they changed physically to appear much cuter and cuddlier while their brains grew smaller.

Dogs love eye contact with humans.  Both the dog and it's master experience a release of oxytocin, the bonding drug, when their eyes meet.  On the other hand, a wolf, even a pup, will not experience any positive feelings from eye contact.  However much a handler tries to habituate a pup to eye contact, it won't improve the situation. 

In other words, dogs bond with humans in a way that wolves simply can't.  Dogs don't become part of the family because they simply slot into a hierarchical structure that mimics their "natural" structure.  They bond with us as they would their own family.

Please ignore dimwits like the self-styled "Dog Whisperer", César Milan, who run with this nonsense about being the alpha or pack leader.

Of course, selective breeding has had a massive impact upon how various breeds act.  Breeders have heightened territoriality in some breeds but suppressed it in others.  And of course dogs will have different levels of dominance or submission even in the same litter.

My dog is large but breeders have strived for over 2000 years to ensure the breed has little territoriality and is kind to all mankind.  In its area of origin, it is commonly used as a living blanket by young children.  He's a good watchdog in the sense that he barks loudly if strangers approach and he appears very excited, so couriers and meter-readers refuse to come in.  But he's a bad guard dog as he just wants a stroke from them if they do come in.  If you want a guard dog, you need a breed with more territoriality.  But that trait means they'll jealously guard humans, bones and toys as much as real estate and unwanted attacks are an unfortunate side-effect.

Re: Dobermans

Reply #18
I think this thread basically summarize the situation, having a dog to act as a guard dog is a double edge sword, especially if you have the wrong domestic arrangements, limited time to invest and the wrong breed.

The concern in Woodstock's opening post is the line;

With all that said and given I am away a fair bit in the City while Mrs.Woodstock and our 8 and 4 years olds are at home

If he invests in one of the larger and potentially more timid breeds, note it's timidity leads to aggressive behavior, he'd want to have a lot of time available!
The Force Awakens!

Re: Dobermans

Reply #19
By the way, dominance and aggression aren't necessarily the same thing.  My dog is VERY dominant.  When he was a pup, I was worried that, if left unchecked, his demands would continue to escalate and he would become uncontrollable.  Unfortunately, he transferred his evident love of chomping on his litter mates' back legs to us and no calf was safe.  This caused us to worry that he might not have inherited his breed's key trait.  But with time and socialisation down the dog park, he soon stopped biting and now appears perturbed if his teeth accidently make contact with me.  He still has the same set of demands that he had at the start.  His list of demands hasn't grown and he hasn't become more aggressive while claiming his due.  He simply barks incessantly when he wants to be fed, insists on being fed by hand, requires full access to all parts of the house (once ripping out the dog door when we blocked it off when he was being naughty), steals socks and underwear and takes them to the front door when he wants to go into the front yard, and growls playfully when we try to retrieve them.  But he doesn't get up on any furniture or claim any particular spot in the house and he doesn't steal food or anything else.  He's never so much as growled in anger at anyone in the family or the many children who've approached him to pat him.  The only thing is he likes to hump big dogs and that tends to result in battles, mostly involving barking and wrestling, when the other dog takes offence or tries to turn the tables.  So, he's highly dominant but low in aggression towards humans.

Re: Dobermans

Reply #20
Not sure it is fair or accurate MAV to say that alpha dog / hierarchy etc stuff is passe. Most breeders will tell you that dogs like to know who's boss in the home and to have a well behaved critter, discipline and control are important.

I do agree that domesticated animals have for hundreds of years been stable and good family members and comparisons to the wolf packs is drawing on a very long bow. Not sure who that odd biologist from the 70s was who made those assertions but it varies considerably from the information I've received over the years from breeders.

If any of my dogs barked incessantly until fed, nipped at legs and put family belongings at the front door until he got what he wanted, it'd be off to training asap. Sounds like a nutter! Who's got who trained!!

Our dogs were all trained and loved but knew their place. In fact you could put your hand in the feed bowl when any of them were eating and they'd simply step back. They were also trained to bark on command so if a potential intruder needed to be frightened away you'd just give the hand signal and she'd let rip for a few seconds and that would do the trick. And, really, that is mostly all that is ever needed from a domesticated dog... a good bark and potential evil doers FO to a quieter place, which most cops will confirm.
Only our ruthless best, from Board to bootstudders will get us no. 17

Re: Dobermans

Reply #21
My son and I have both studied behavioural science some 30 years apart, and understanding of dog behaviour hasn't changed in that time.  It is very much based on pack hierarchy and understanding that is the key to a well-adjusted, well-behaved dog.

Of course, domestic dogs aren't as attuned to appropriate candid behaviour as wolves or dingoes but, with a little work, that can be overcome.

There's a great show on TV from time to time in which animal behaviourists from a UK university attempt to address behavioural problems caused mainly by owners who have allowed their dogs to take over the pack.

“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: Dobermans

Reply #22
All this stuff about pecking order, alphas, and pack hierarchy is a bit passé.  It emanated from the 70s when a biologist observed wolves which were in captivity in a wildlife refuge.  As wolves made themselves scarce when humans went into the wild, this was a rare opportunity.  What this guy saw was that the wolves acted like hardened prisoners.  They fought each other to be boss and the boss had to withstand constant challenges.  This researcher then theorised that dogs operated in the same way as they were, after all, descended from wolves.  Back then, domestic animals such as dogs and cats weren't considered to be worthy of study, so this theory wasn't challenged.  Dog trainers were happy with this 'pack leader' theory as it merely validated their way of doing their thing - using harsh discipline to show the dogs who is boss.

In fact, the behaviour of the wolves wasn't reflective of their behaviour in the wild let alone how dogs behave.  In the wild, wolves live in family units.  Neither the father nor the mother is the 'alpha'.  They lead most of the time because they have the experience but the young wolves will take the lead on occasions if they're the best hunters, etc.. There was no 'alpha' in the sense of dominating access to resources (food, shelter, sex) with the others taking turns after the alpha was finished according to the hierarchy.  Quite the contrary - the parents provided for their progeny.  The wolves in the refuge were males who weren't related but were forced to share limited space and resources.

Researchers have noted that packs of stray dogs just don't form stable hierarchies and there is no domination of resources.

Dogs have been domesticated for millenia.  The process of domestication has changed dogs massively.  Selective breeding took wolves that were unusually friendly towards humans and reinforced this quality.  A Russian researcher showed how this process would have worked by running a breeding program with Silver Foxes over 40 generations.  Silver Foxes are extremely avoidant of contact with humans in the wild but he ended up with foxes which had radically changed in looks and behaviour.  Not only did the foxes end up craving contact with humans but also they changed physically to appear much cuter and cuddlier while their brains grew smaller.

Dogs love eye contact with humans.  Both the dog and it's master experience a release of oxytocin, the bonding drug, when their eyes meet.  On the other hand, a wolf, even a pup, will not experience any positive feelings from eye contact.  However much a handler tries to habituate a pup to eye contact, it won't improve the situation. 

In other words, dogs bond with humans in a way that wolves simply can't.  Dogs don't become part of the family because they simply slot into a hierarchical structure that mimics their "natural" structure.  They bond with us as they would their own family.

Please ignore dimwits like the self-styled "Dog Whisperer", César Milan, who run with this nonsense about being the alpha or pack leader.

Of course, selective breeding has had a massive impact upon how various breeds act.  Breeders have heightened territoriality in some breeds but suppressed it in others.  And of course dogs will have different levels of dominance or submission even in the same litter.

My dog is large but breeders have strived for over 2000 years to ensure the breed has little territoriality and is kind to all mankind.  In its area of origin, it is commonly used as a living blanket by young children.  He's a good watchdog in the sense that he barks loudly if strangers approach and he appears very excited, so couriers and meter-readers refuse to come in.  But he's a bad guard dog as he just wants a stroke from them if they do come in.  If you want a guard dog, you need a breed with more territoriality.  But that trait means they'll jealously guard humans, bones and toys as much as real estate and unwanted attacks are an unfortunate side-effect.


Obviously I dont agree with the non hierarchy viewpoint and and my experience with German Shepherds differs from your theories.....I dont watch Cesar Milan but I do know how my dogs behave/have behaved and they have all tried to assert themselves and show dominance over humans and other animals....

Re: Dobermans

Reply #23
I'm not saying that dogs shouldn't be trained or disciplined.  Just that the pack leader theory has been discredited.  Positive reinforcement is now the preferred model.  For instance, clicker training is useful in associating obedience with immediate reward.

I couldn't immediately find the scholarly article that I had in mind but THIS LINK pretty much covers the same territory.  As the author says:
Quote
Just as, more than six decades ago, Schenkel extrapolated his wolf studies and applied them to domestic dogs, so too have many carried the notion of the "alpha wolf" over to dog training. Certainly, just as parent wolves hold dominance over their cubs and human parents hold dominance over their children, owners hold dominance over their dogs. Until my pup gets himself a credit card and a pair of opposable thumbs (and stops dissolving into delighted wiggles every time I tell him what a good little man he is), I'm pretty much the boss in our relationship. But some trainers take the idea of pack rank to the extreme; dog owners are given a laundry list of rules of how to maintain alpha status in all aspects of their relationship: Don't let your dog walk through the door before you do. Don't let her win a game of tug. Don't let him eat before you do. Some (famous) trainers even encourage acts of physical dominance that can be dangerous for lay people to execute. Much of this is a legacy of those old wolf studies, suggesting that we're in constant competition with our dogs for that pack leader position.

But, you might ask, mightn't domestic dogs behave much like wolves in captivity? Despite being members of the same species, wolves (even human-reared wolves) are behaviorally distinct from domestic dogs, especially when it comes to human beings. Take the famous experiment in which human-socialized wolves and domestic dogs are both presented with a cage with food inside. The food is placed inside a cage in a way that makes it impossible for either wolf or dog to retrieve it. The wolves will inevitably keep working at the cage, trying to puzzle out a way to remove the food. The dogs, after a few seconds of struggle, will look to a human as if to say, "Hey, buddy, a little help here?" Even if the hierarchical ranks were some innate part of lupine psychology, dogs have behaviors all their own.

That experiment that showed that dogs seek help from humans but human-socialised wolves don't has also been replicated with cats and dogs.  Cats will try to do it on their own but dogs seek help.

The laundry list of don'ts makes me think of one of my son's school friends.  He had a little fox terrier that was trying to play with him.  He told him off, wrapped his arms around his chest and turned his back on him.  He told me he'd been reading a book written by Martin McKenna, yet another self-styled dog whisperer who also goes by the name 'The Dog Man'.  Like César Milan, his main qualification is that he says he realised he was like Dr Doolittle early in life as he just knew instinctively how to talk to dogs.  Like Milan, he says everything comes down to dominating dogs like a pack leader.  I borrowed the book and found a lengthy list of don'ts which includes not looking at your dog when it looks at you and not stroking your dog when he wants attention.  According to him, every time you do, your dog scores another win.  This poor kid had been following this idiot's rantings and he was missing out on the fun of having a dog!

César Milan uses physical means to dominate dogs.  One of his brilliant tips is to stand beside your dog when it does something wrong and swing your far leg behind the other one so that you drive your heel into your dog's stomach/chest.  He says this catches your dog by surprise but doesn't hurt it.  He also is a master of the dog roll.  If a dog's being naughty, he wrestles it so that it's on its back and holds it in that position until it calms down.  He theorises that mother dogs do that but he doesn't have much evidence to suggest that dogs learn if humans do this instead.  He does suggest you should leave this technique to professionals like him as dogs tend to bite him because they don't like it. 

I have trained my dog pretty well.  It's just that Samoyeds are a stubborn and independent breed that some suggest are more like cats than dogs.  They have a mischievous nature and love forcing you to repeat your commands as if they have no idea what you're saying.  But I went into it with eyes open as I love their spirit.  When people ask me whether they can be trained, I tell them that training can go really quickly as long as the human is a good learner.  You find out what will work with each individual and adjust.  They're definitely not the sort of dog you'd get if you want to impress people with its immediate and unquestioning obedience.

They are smart though.  He immediately took to the dog-door when he came in as a 2 month old pup and toilet trained himself in a week.  I can walk him off lead on busy streets and he waits for a signal to cross the road.  But he knows what he wants.  The incessant barking only happens if I ignore "The Look".  If I get up and follow him, he'll show me what he wants and I won't hear a peep.  I used to try to tell him off when he took off with the laundry and put him into the naughty corner but it didn't change his behaviour.  So I learnt to go along with the game and used the fact that he was clamping down on the clothing to stroke him all over his muzzle and face (which I enjoy more than he does).  So everybody's happy!  That's what you have to do as a dog owner.  The bonding process is as much about finding out what they like as it is about getting your dog to do what you want.



Re: Dobermans

Reply #24
Thank you all for your insights, opinions, experiences and recommendations.

We're going to meet an aquaintance of my Wife's, who will bring along her Doberman. This came from a very respected pedigree breeder I.e purebred and free of common genetic defects and bred to maximise the best traits in the dog. I'll let you know how I go.

I do find it interesting that while some people are terrified of dogs, some have experienced a bad encounter or had someone close to them experience one, that I still believe most times the dog owner has an equal if higher responsibility than the dog. Unless you've got a Pitbull, American or otherwise, or perhaps a Rottweiler, who are renown to be very susceptible to high pitched noises that drive them to react badly, I think with correct breeding, good, consistent training and a calm house hold will allow you to have a measured calm dog of almost all breeds. I read somewhere a post that said something like, "some people are suspicious of dogs, but I totally trust a dog that doesn't like a person." That really rings true to me. Personally, I can't stand little yappie dogs like Jack Russells or Yorkshire Terriers or a crapzu - they can be right little bastards and are well known for sourly attitudes and taking a nip at people. Anyway, enough of that. Much to think on.

Thanks again everyone. I was quite surprised by the amount of feedback and passionate discussion. Yet again we prove how awesome this forum is, we can agree to disagree, but we do it with class!  8)
Keep the Faith

Re: Dobermans

Reply #25
We had a female Doberman for 10 years before she got bone cancer.

A BEAUTIFUL DOG! Loyal, protective and obedient, with basic training, puppy training at a school for 6 weeks and a whole lot of love.

When my daughter was born and my wife and I would leave the lounge room while Jada (my daughter) was in her bassinet, Dixie would get up from her bag that she sat on inside and would lie between the front door and Jada until we came back in the room.

She slept outside and you would hear her get up and run the boundary of the year just "doing her rounds" and if someone would walk up the street in an area that she thought was hers (which was everything she could see) then barking was one the menu for the next couple of minutes. I spoke to my neighbours and neither minded because they knew when she barked there were people around.

Could not recommend a breed more highly, we've have friend who also had a Dobie and he had the same experience as us. Sadly my eldest son is Autistic and has issues with the loud barking and the sheer size or her so until he's bigger we will have to hold off on getting another one, hopefully soon.

Re: Dobermans

Reply #26
Good luck with the search for your new dog(s) Woodstock.  I'm sure you'll end up with a loyal companion and years of unwavering devotion.

If anyone is interested in more up to date research into wild candid behaviour, Brad Purcell's "Dingo" is a good read.  It even has a photograph of a subordinate female adopting a submissive pose when approached by the dominant female  :)

Of course, dogs respond best to reward training but that's very different to ensuring that your dog knows it's place in the world.  One simple technique is to ask visitors to ignore your dog for at least 30 minutes.
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: Dobermans

Reply #27
Did you read the article I linked, DJC?  You would have noted that social dominance was covered:

Quote
This doesn't mean that wolves don't display social dominance, however. When a recent piece purporting to dispel the "myth" of canine dominance appeared on Psychology Today, ethologist Marc Bekoff quickly stepped in. Wolves (and other animals, including humans), display social dominance, he notes; it just isn't always easy to boil dominant behavior down to simple explanations. Dominant behavior and dominance relationships can be highly situational, and can vary greatly from individual to individual even within the same species. It's not the entire concept of wolves displaying social dominance that was dispelled, just the simple hierarchical pack structure. In response to the same piece, Mech pointed to a 2010 article he published detailing his observance of an adult gray wolf repeatedly pinning and straddling a male pack mate over the course of six and a half minutes. "We interpreted this behavior as an extreme example of an adult wolf harassing a maturing offspring, perhaps in prelude to the offspring's dispersal."

Re: Dobermans

Reply #28
Did you read the article I linked, DJC?  You would have noted that social dominance was covered:

Yes, but it's popular internet literature rather than an empirical study.

Purcell's book deals with communal living wild canid social organisation from several viewpoints; biology, communication, learning, territory, territory inheritance, dispersal, social systems, inter and intra pack interactions, etc. 

Laurie Corbett's 'The Dingo in Australia and Asia' is another work with a detailed analysis of wild canid behaviour and social organisation.  While it dates back to 1995, the behavioural observations are still valid and agree with those of Purcell.

Social organisation, characterised by dominant and subordinate behaviour, is a key to minimising conflict, facilitating successful communal hunting and communal care of pups, as well as the formation and maintenance of territories.  Failing to appreciate the importance of ensuring that your dog understands its place its social group is asking for trouble.

Even though it was published over 60 years ago, Konrad Lorenz's 'Man Meets Dog' provides a fascinating series of observations of domestic dog (and wolf) behaviour that can still help dog owners understand why their pets behave the way they do.
“Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?”  Oddball

Re: Dobermans

Reply #29
Dr John Bradshaw, a biologist who started the anthrozoology department at Bristol University, has published a fair bit of work on the dominance theory regarding dogs. 

In 2011, his book In Defence of Dogs was published.  You can glean the thrust of it from this review in the Telegraph.

In 2014, he co-wrote Dominance in domestic dogs: A response to Schilder et al. (2014).  As the title indicates, it responded to Dominance in domestic dogs revisited: Useful habit and useful construct?, Schilder et al., both published in the Journal of Veterinary Behaviour.  They set out 2 sides of the debate.  Dr Bradshaw concluded that:

Quote
Similarly, although it is clear that dogs have retained many of the individual patterns of intraspecific communicative behavior from the wolf, we urge caution in extrapolating the function of these behaviors from free-ranging dogs, or indeed wolves, to the behavior of companion dogs, for 2 reasons. Not only has the significance of the various displays almost certainly been altered during the pro- cess of domestication, but also the lifetime experiences of companion dogs are very different from those of their free-ranging counterparts. We particularly urge against the extrapolation of conclusions drawn from the intraspecific behavior of free-ranging dogs to the interpretation of interspecific behavior directed by companion dogs toward humans. Put simply, we do not believe that the fact that human observers can measure consistent relationships between some pairs of dogs, and can define these as dominance relationships, should be interpreted as providing evidence for the hypothesis that “dominance” is an inherent (“personality”) characteristic of dogs, nor that their behaviors are driven by the motivation to enhance their relative “status.” Indeed, we argue that at our current state of knowledge of cognitive processes in the Carnivora, it is misleading to presume that domestic dogs have the mental capacity to conceptualize “status.”

We also consider it dangerous to use such extrapolations to support techniques used to alter the behavior of companion dogs, whether that be basic training or the resolution of behavioral disorders. The “dominance” concept has long been used to justify the application of pain and fear in dog training, but it is becoming increasingly apparent that not only are such methods potentially dangerous for the person using them, they are counterproductive in terms of behavioral outcomes, owner-pet bonds, and canine welfare (Rooney and Bradshaw, 2014; Schalke et al., 2007; Schilder and van der Borg, 2004). 

The relationship between dogs and their owners has been the subject of much more research recently and older texts and those that extrapolate the behaviour of wolves or wild dogs have to be treated with great caution.  The jury's not out yet (as the disagreement between Drs. Bradshaw and Schilder shows) but the notion that humans need to dominate their dogs is shaky at best.  Positive reinforcement and rewards-based training rather than continual vigilance to ensure that the dog is seen to submit at all times may be all that's required.

As an example, I'd never ask guests to ignore my dog for 30 minutes.  The easiest way to get rid of a Samoyed is to give it some attention.  Once they know they've won you over, they're off.  Guests who play hard to get build up their excitement and desire for attention.  Playing dominance games like this just creates a problem that doesn't need to exist.  It certainly doesn't produce any long-term benefit.  Of course, other breeds and individual dogs may react differently.