Alpha...shmalpha!!!!!!

Great read, especially for those who still subscribe to the old Alpha male/pair theories -

http://www.wolf.org/wolves/news/iwmag/2008/winter/alphawolf.pdf

How interesting....

I particularly like the part about the Yellowstone wolves. Many "alpha proponents" use the studies there as proof, while as the article says, the wolf packs here are not actually the norm.

Yup.....I've looked into this, including that study mentioned. Wolf Status and Dominance in Packs -Alpha Status

And have said this all along when debating this subject.

But try to get the point across to CM proponents or other similar types with similar beliefs and they poo poo all wolf biologists or other science. CM knows best. RFFFFFF.
And these are wolves! No domestic dogs. That's a whole 'nuther story. Alpha schmalpha is right.

But they do admit there are pack leaders and still sometimes need to refer to the oldest female as alpha.

It's really semantics but I can understand why they'd want to change the terms. It all goes along with trying to get rid of that nasty image a lot of people have of a wolf being viscious and nasty. Calling the head of the packs the leaders or heads of the pack sounds much nicer.

I think it's even more than mere semantics. A lot of the general public who hang onto the "alpha" model and that is often been used as the model of what he was describing as the old way of viewing wolves....as random animals that don't know each other coming together in a pack and setting up a hierarchy with challenges and fighting, a slew of ritualisitc behavior to determine who should be head honcho. That is the connotation of the term, "alpha" that has been connected to it for so long. And this is not the way wolf packs in general work.

Apparently, occassionally there is a rare pack made up of unrelated wolves, but that is very rare. And sometimes they'll take in a stray here and there and that will become an adopted sibling.

So the understanding that this is a family and the parents guide just like any parents of any animal guide their young is better described as he does, as parents....since the term "alpha" (whether correct or not in the dictionary) has taken on that extra flavor beyond simply being parents. Along with it comes visions of wolves fighting and engagin in a whole lot of ritualistic behavior to determine rank as in a linear hierarchy and so forth, which is simply not the case. Not only visions, but people have actually latched onto this belief that this is what they do in nature. Not so, not unless captive and unrelated wolves are thrown together into an enclosure and fed by humans. Natural wolf behavior can not be observed accurately in this way but people have unrelentingly latched onto these pictures of stressed out wolves which will fight more....and connotations in connection with the term, "alpha."

Of course communicative behaviors are seen and some may have to do with discipline and so forth but how people assume the purpose is for determining or challenging rank.....I just don't know how they jump to conclusions like that.

And what's worse, they've falsely attributed these inaccurate assumptions about wolves to dogs! And dogs really get the short end of the stick on this one. Way too much emphasis is placed blindly on social status by a lot of people.

See, Dober, to ME, that's semantics.

Well then....to me, semantics or terminology is actually more important than meets the eye. Because when you are talking about something of a scientific nature, those little details matter. But that's the scientist in me.

Very true, very true. I am not one who ever makes huge generalizations so can very much appreciate having the details correct.

And another thing. I was just analyzing what I think of when I think of my dogs and me. I mean this alpha thing is so tenacously hung onto by a lot of people. Okay, so alpha means number one in the Greek alphabet. Number one, assuming that it is more important than number 2 or 3 and so on. Higher up. The first.

That said, I don't consider myself number one with my dogs or more important. I don't consider them underneath me. I am not conscious of any hierarchy persay. So I teach them things so they don't become obnoxious, spoiled brats. I guide them and I do so by teaching them things. But to me, I'm not higher or better. We're just a different species.

My dogs are participants in the relationship, not mere followers all the time. We kind of go side by side. They teach me things too. But if I want to live harmoniously with another species, I need them to learn things.

So, to me, I don't see any real hierarchy within my dog/human family. I don't see any hierarchy between the dogs in my household either. There is no regular, consitent number one. It's completely fluid who gets their own way...who wins the bone. And that has nothing to do with hierarchy anyhow, IMO. It's just like siblings who may both want the same thing and one loses out one time and the other may get it the next time.

I definately understand what you mean, bj, about semantics. But ok, if you say that "alpha" and "parent" are basically the same thing, would you call your mother (or father) the alpha of your household? Are you then the "betta"?

I think it's more than semantics, I think it's the whole definition behind the word, as well as the emotions that the words evoke.

Sure, I'd use the terminology alpha/father interchangeably but the article does state the one of the main reasons for the change is to try and educate people who generalize about wolves so they aren't using such "strong" terms. I'm not arguing - just saying that, for ME, it's semantics.

(And I'm NEVER the beta - I'm all alpha here!! LOL D

Great article.. thanks for sharing !

The difference as I see it is that "Alpha" suggests that there is some struggle to create a hierarchy, hat the wolves in the pack all struggle and fight for and defend this status from the other wolves int he pack.

By saying "parent" or "breeding pair" it stops being so hierarchical and seems more like a family structure, something people relate to better. It sounds like something you are born into and that's just the way it is, that is mom and that is dad and they are leaders of the family, the end. There was no struggle to determine this as is often implied with the "alpha" term.

So it's somewhat semantics but it's also the implied meanings of the words, does alpha HAVE to mean that there was a struggle to determine hierarchy and that everyone is trying to become alpha? No. but many people assume that. when the word "parent" is used no one assumes anyone is trying to take the parent role from their parents in the pack, that would make no sense.

Love that! It's one of my favorite links to give to Cesar's minions.

I'm very skeptical of his claim that the Yellowstone wolves are set up in the pack structure they are because they're "special." While they did have abundant food at first (elk were wildly overpopulated when they were introduced), the elk population has dropped and the wolf population has expanded to fill its niche, which is normal.

In addition, a quick check reveals that Isle Royale (Minnesota) wolf biologists ALSO refer to the pack "leaders" as alphas.

http://www.isleroyalewolf.org/ann_rep_pdf/ISRO_annrep07-08.pdf

The packs there were naturally formed and never had the abundance of food the Yellowstone wolves once had.

Maybe not in those exact terms, but basically, yes. If my mom said it once, she said it a million times "Because *I* an the mother and *you* are the child." If a kid was sitting in a seat and an adult wanted it, it was considered rude to not give that adult the seat, etc.

My mom was not an authoritarian parent by any means--but there was a pecking order--mom/stepdad (and sometimes dad), then me and my stepbrothers.....

ETA: While I don't use the term "alpha," I do think that dogs need leadership and boundaries. It seems that just about all social creatures have boundaries or "rules" that their group members adhere to.

It would be silly for scientists to change terms every time the public got something wrong anyway. I read about one woman who hated Einstein because of his theory of relativity . . . because she thought it had something to do with MORAL relativity. *slaps forehead* If you tell the public at large that wolf packs are led by a breeding pair, their new training technique will probably be having sex in front of their dogs. Either that or humping them.

I have actually heard, can't remember from where ATM, but I have heard someone spout off that your dogs should see you having sex to reinforce the idea that you (and your partner) are the alphas.

Have you seen the Jean Donaldson video? The dog is humping her though, because there's no such thing as dominance. :rofl1:

Actually that video is of Jean using sex as a reinforcer, not something I'd do but hey hard to argue that's not reinforcing for the dog.