Cesar’s Way 112-120
This section is too long for me quote all of it.
But he starts by talking about how wolves and “wild dogs” (does he mean Lycaon? Lycaon actually have less aggression in their packs than wolves do!) live in packs, and how the pack leader controls every. The leader eats first.
Then he starts telling us how this structure, which is not100 percent accurate for wild wolves is exactly how you should behave towards your dog.
“In nature, if a pack leader shows any weakness at all, he will be attack and replaced a stronger member of the pack. This is true among all animal species that live in tiered social systems. Only the strong can lead” (116).
So if there is a lot of evidence that wolves behave like this in nature, this exactly how you should treat your dog.
This argument is called an “appeal to nature” argument. It is very commonly made these days. If it is natural, it is good for you. It is better than artificial. Appeal to nature arguments also say that if that way things are is because of nature. This argument is very common in politics, especially when we’re talking about economics. The problem with using these arguments is that they are very hard to falsify. You also have know what the “real nature” is before you start making such claims.
What’s interesting is that I find really good descriptions of Coppinger’s description that dogs are morphologically different from wolves– that’s what Cesar means when he says dogs are different from wolves. But in behavior, Cesar seems to think they are 100 percent interchangeable. Now, if that’s true, Shaun Ellis is probably the person to call for dog behavior problems.
Now, I do say dogs are wolves, but when I say that, I’m not saying they are big game hunting wolves from northern Eurasia or North America. Those animals are actually quite specialized, and they are very different from wolves from southern Eurasia. We count them as the same species, but their behavior and conformation is very different. Wild wolves are probably the most variable large species on the planet. That’s why domestic dogs come in such a wide variety of shapes.
Dogs have a nature in that they are social, but unlike wolves, they are much more the result of the environment in which they are raised. Dogs are better associative learners than wolves are. They are also better at reading human body language. That means that “dog nature” is less written in stone than wolves are.
Now, I can go on and explain what most wolf packs are, but I think it’s now mostly useless. Most wolf packs are a mated pair and their offspring. There is very little conflict in these groupings. In the megapacks of Yellowstone, where multiple breeding females once existed, conflict did occur. It’s very simple. A pack can only bring so much food back to the den, so a female will want to keep rival females from getting an advantage in this respect.
However, I’m not going into this, because this is far more complex and nuanced than you’d imagine.
My main point is this:
Domestication has changed the dog in the same way the frigid wastes of the polar regions have changed the Arctic wolf and the scorching deserts of the Middle East have changed the Arabian wolf.
I see no discussion about how dogs behave differently from wild or captive wolves in any of Cesar’s texts, and because that’s not there, Cesar is saying that dogs and wolves behave the same.
If you don’t believe me, read the whole section!
Retrieverman, I am going to recommend something to you that I did, that was very therapeutic and an excellent release. Normally I would NEVER deface a book–I get really angry when I see people have highlighted all over books and written comments, etc. But to be perfectly hypocritical, I got a cheapo copy of Coppinger’s dog domestication drivel, and just let myself go–highlighted and scribbled comments on almost every page refuting this or that! I finally felt so—FREE!!!! I suggest you do that with any of Caesar’s books! You’ll feel a LOT better!…but back to the subject at hand(oops, there went my right middle finger! Now its up to the right ring finger….). Whenever I get into these discussions on the differences and likenesses between wolves and dogs, I try to get people to see that they are not differences/likenesses in KIND, but in DEGREE, and it is different for each type of dog you consider, just as all breeds have differences between them. Make no mistake, domestication is HUGE in the changes that it can bring about, but there will always be some basic similarities between a domestic animal’s looks and behaviour, and that of it’s wild ancestors–it helps to get a better perspective on this by considering many of the other domesticated critters out there. I think learning about wolf behaviour in the wild(and captivity!) is very interesting, and can be applied in some situations and explain some things, but certainly not everything. People seem to get too polarized, one side or the other on this issue, and of course, it is BOTH! Dogs are like wolves(more that any other wild critter!) and dogs are also unlike wolves in many ways. It is both! I get real irked at wolf behaviourists who look at dogs as some degenerate, less intelligent, artificial form of a wolf(which many do!)–this automatically alienates the dog people! And the dog people go on and on about the “savagery” and intractability, and untrainability, and treacherousness of wolves, even to the point of refusing to accept that wolves ARE the dogs’ wild ancestors! I am caught smack dab in the middle, because I know better on both counts! It really is almost RELIGIOUS in nature, and dare I say it(yes! I MUST!) so DOGMATIC! Which is not quite the same as Wolfmatic, but derived from that……
I would, but even Cesar has things in it that I can use for a reference.
One of the things you need to do is that, even if you disagree with a text, is keep it around.
I have a retriever training book– a classic text that I still look at even if I’m not about to whip out the cattle prod.
You’re not talking James Lamb Free, are you?
That’s the only true classic I can think of, and I don’t think it features a cattle prod… am I missing a book in my historical “library” (aka, the pile of books on the brown footstool)?
Tom Quinn mentions a cattle prod, but doesn’t tell you to use it.
James Lamb Free uses his belt to give a dog a “good licking.”
Howeve, in that book, he says not use it on a golden.
Ah–Quinn.
Funny–I still READ James Lamb Free, though I consider it outdated and not “modern.” There’s something about his attitude and voice that I find compelling.
Quinn I consider “modern”, but I can’t say I much read it, though there’s usable training advice and good anecdotes–instead, I get caught up in the illustrations, which are lovely.
Someday I want the old hardcover–I’ve gotten the impression there are actual plates (do you know if this is true?).
I read him all the time.
He’s not an idiot.
And he hates the “conditioned retrieve.” He has a huge rant in there.
No, James Lamb Free is far from an idiot, though I suspect his impressions of force fetch have more to do with watching pointing dog trainers.
He’s regular reading–though I think I know the book by heart. I remember reading it when I got my first Lab, and going back through his old listing of trial-pointed Labs and highlighting my old newspaper-dog’s ancestors ( I never did train him, not even a decent recall, but he was still a great dog).
I have the same edition of Quinn.
I don’t know about the original Quinn book.
And you’re right about the illustrations.
The one I have has a foreword by Stephen Bodio. I didn’t know who Stephen Bodio was until I started blogging.
Then you know Flaubert’s quote on on his blog page.
Yes. And I love it.
Have you read Steinhart’s The Company of Wolves?
The Company of Wolves
It’s a bit dated, but wolf experts get into the damnedest fights you’ve ever heard of. The late Gordon Haber and someone get into such a fight over wolf control in Alaska, that you almost want Cesar or maybe Jimmy Carter to separate them!
I liked that one. Barry Lopez’ Of Wolves and Men I liked more, but think it’s just because I liked the writing better.
I found Steve’s blog while I was looking for Tazis or Taigan, right after I got back online after being completely off for several years. I missed the entire brouhaha about open field coursing in California. The two Tazi pups I have here (one going to Scotland in a couple months!) are related to one of Steve’s.
I found it– I think on the occasion in which you first commented on this blog.
My favorite vacations growing up were to the Southwest.
After reading any serious wolf-book, it’s heart and also brain-tearing to think why many people want to cease the exictence of this species.
I’d compare dogs and wolves to a newyorker and an indian or any other of the kind of originality. Their physiological surroundings and their cultures are so different.
A modern man is the product of some hundereds of years. To a modern man, almosti all of the things are “instrumental”. You see, they are “super-monkeys”.
Would you let him to master how to treat the other creatures
- was he a ceasar a not?
Right now all this reminds me of counting the number of angels on the head of a pin. And most of us are not scholastics.
Comparing wolves to dogs can go only so far and then the analogy stops because I do not think we have all the information to connect the dots. I do not think we ever will have all the information to get a conclusion.
Maybe we can compare it to interpreting baseball statistics, thank you all the same, I prefer to train my dog.
Really? I guess I have selective reading then. :)