Teekoness, yes! I agree. Mr. Mech is a breath of fresh air. I love this guy , he is THE one and only authority concerning wolves and wolf research, as far as I'm concerned. He is leagues above all the so called wolf experts who do nothing but regurge the empty bull shit they hear on 'Animal Planet.'
The picture he gives us is only half the story. Because the claim he is making is that a wolf pack is literally just a family, where the leader is the one who gave birth to his followers. But that doesn't mean that all wolf packs are only families. How do wolves find mates, because they cannot procreate with each other. Does it mean that the male wolves leave the pack and find a single female wolf and then form their own pack? This is only part of the story. Because those same wolves who leave their group can easily go join other packs and what's the dynamics then? In those situations fights will happen, but what is the hierarchical structure in those other packs where family isn't binding the whole group? What about research about packs/groups that aren't formed by families, but rather different wolves, from different families? Because there are also videos and information that indicates that in such packs, fights for dominance are real and according to claims by researchers, only the alpha wolf is allowed to mate, so in those sorts of situations, do they tyrannically take over the whole pack, or what is the situation then?
This doesn't change how we should approach the hierarchy of a pack. You can still become a leader without raising a dog from birth. This just explains how it happens naturally in the wild.
@@123natemans It absolutely _does_ change how we see the hierarchy of a pack. Because we see now that our ideas were far too rigid to accurately represent how packs exist in nature. Natural hierarchy and dominance is not the same as social conditioning done by humans.
as a dog trainer, i'm trying VERY hard to spread this information. it's amazing the turn around dogs can have once they're shown their boundaries in a non-aggressive 'alpha' way.
I agree. The same could be said about family. Do you respect you're abusive dad or your loving grandfather? When you do something wrong, do you dread the beating or do you dread the disappointment? I always hated getting hit. It made me feel weak and worthless. It didn't change my behavior and really made me more rebellious, angry, and hateful. What I really felt made me change my ways was when my grandfather picked me up from the PD after I was caught shoplifting. I was terrified. I didn't care about the cops, I didn't care about my dads belt. He said to me, "you know this makes us all look bad?" I cared about that. Then he took me out for Chinese and we talked about it. You can't do all that with a dog but you can mimic it and it works. Same as it worked for me, the simplified way for a dog works the same.
hoo man, you would not believe what some people will do to say this guy is a lone nut. science always discovers new data constantly, so how is it this guy is suddenly a nut job? probably cause people dont want to admit they are just jerks.
Because he said right off the bat that would be a hunting season needed if wolves recovered in the US. I remember him saying that about 1980. Lots of people didn't want to hear it.
Isaac Shepard I wouldn’t call him a nut, but he’s wrong about the alpha term. It still applies. He proves it with everything he said after. It’s a universal term. All he did was describe different versions and different reasons of and for the alphas. In science new information, observations, and evidence doesn’t usually call for a new term to be used but typically a new description of the established term. Correct the misunderstanding of what alphas are.
@@eclipsewrecker not exactly. Scientists change terminology because the word used doesn't imply the correct meaning. In this case, a new term was developed because it implies a more specific meaning. Alpha just meant leader. Breeding now implies they are the leader because they are the parent of most of the pack. Making sure the terminology is better isn't just good for the scientists, it's also good for science communication.
@@alajononon you stated that a new term is used because it needed a more specific meaning, but the discovery lead to a broader meaning. Alpha still applies. The pack was observed. The observer/researcher identified the positions in the pack, then defined it by the behaviors. When the observer/researcher identified the positions in wild packs they realized that their original defining behaviors were not consistent. Redefine. No new term is necessary. This was an emotional plea from this man, who felt responsible misleading people who acted by his definitions. It was not scientific at all.
Dr. Without a doubt,you are the besting the field! We have indeed learned much in 35 years with more to come. Thanks for all your time and dedicated focus over the years
Dr. David Mech is one of the foremost if not the foremost experts on wolves, having spent over 30+ yrs studying the wolf, how intricate a wolf pack is, wolf prey and other areas. Dr. Mech once said that when a wolf pack makes a kill they eat nearly everything, all that could be left are some bones, the stomach contents, the lower jaw, the backbone and that is it, they are unable to digest everything!
You are not the "Pack Leader" or "Alpha" to your dog. You are the parent. A dog will often mimic its owner's behavior. Disciplining or yelling at your dog when they misbehave sometimes won't work. Maybe their attitude towards YOU might change, but they may just end up mimicing you, making them loud and aggressive towards other dogs or humans.
Je viens d'apprendre que j'étais mère de trois enfants donc, merci pour la nouvelle ! Sérieusement quelles conneries il faut pas entendre, vous essayez de déformer les propos de monsieur Mech. D'ailleurs, il serait plus logique de dire qu'une meute de chiens, par exemple la mienne, ou aucun chien n'est apparenté, se rapproche d'une meute artificielle contrôlée par l'homme et où pourrait donc régner une hiérarchie de domination comme dans la meute de loup captives.
@@liamkerr7183 He's just spewing opinion. A dog does not see you as its parent. No matter what delusions people have about being a dog daddy, dog mommy, or having a fur baby. The dog knows its own mother, and senses it is like itself - a dog as well. Dogs intuit that we are a different species altogether from them. If they didn't know they were dogs, they'd make bad pets, as dogs who lack formative months of socialization with their parents and littermates generally do. What recent research actually suggests is that our relationship with dogs is not like the relationship of a dog and its parent, or like that of a dog and any other rival dog. It is unique.
I honestly think some people are just too stubborn and set in their ways to realize that the way they train their dogs is wrong. It surprises me because hurting and embarrasing your dog shouldnt be something you want to do. Its unfortunate people want to blind eye new found research and treat mans best friend with aggression. One day your dog might turn on you and I wouldnt blame him.
@@liamkerr7183 even the guy who based his original research on it admits that the "alpha" model isnt an accurate representation of natural hierarchy in wolves. Please look at the research and listen to more experts instead of making baseless claims based on your own observations
hamstersniffer well don’t let someone’s misunderstanding of what the alpha is cancel the word. You’re still the alpha in your relationship (if there are others there), but it is up to you how you behave.
@@lloydchristmas4547 it’s actually the opposite. Alpha is a term used throughout science to denote the first and/or first in a hierarchy. Limiting it to physically dominate is not keeping with the science. You seem to think that I disagree with the differences in the behaviors of most wolves in the wild compared to those in captivity. I don’t.
I see so many people screw up dog training by being aggressive, timid and anxious. I also see people completely fail their dog by treating them like a prince/princess. We all know that 99% of us get dogs as cute and cuddly living dolls that exhibit emotions but can't speak lol. This is why you need to train your dog to recognize your tone, words and body language. You most definitely should use a strong tone and body language that shows you are in control. I've trained so many "difficult" breeds like Shiba inu, chow chow and shar pei's and these dogs lose their confidence in your ability to take care of them and any anxiety producing situations if you do not take control of the situation. I know the term "alpha" is misused a lot but when people hear explanations like in this video, they think it means that everything that experienced trainers have learned about dogs is moot and that you can just be your dog's best friend instead of protector and caretaker. Unless your dog is feeding and taking care of itself, it will always look to you to take care of them and it is the humans job to reassure them. That's what being "alpha" is. Not beating your dog into fearing you.
Yes, studies were conducted on captive wolves in the 60s. Because these wolves were unrelated, there was a lot of conflict. The scientists then deducted that wolves form linear hierarchies in packs based on dominance. Dog trainers then took this and used it in their training. However, the studies were flawed by the original scientists themselves, because they later discovered that none of their observations were replicable in the wild. To this day, some dog trainers still hold on to their belief that the only way to train a dog is by dominating them, even when all of the theories have been debunked decades ago by those who created them, and modern research has found no evidence whatsoever that animals learn better through punishment than through positive reinforcement. Just as quick recap on the dominance belief :)
Kathy L can we please be honest about this? Alpha is the correct term for the top of the hierarchy. What is wrong is the misunderstanding and the misuse of the term. All he did in this video is describe different versions of the alphas and how they got the role.
Doesn't that still apply, even if it was in captivity that just means the wolves adapted based on being in a controlled environment. Arent dogs in the same boat? Since they are domesticated and not roaming in the wild wouldn't there be new adaptations?
He is now undoing what he had done, in his innocence. Hold your punches for the people who don't bother educating themselves enough about wolf and dog behavior to notice that these terms are no longer used by wolf researchers.
Not just anybody said that, but the creator of the term alpha said that. I like how he clarified that it's only when there are more than one breeding pair involved that wolves will establish a hierarchy through dominance. Alpha wolves still exist, just not in packs that only consist of one breeding pair and their pups.
@@eclipsewrecker I'm pretty sure they are explaining why most wolf packs don't have an "Alpha, Beta" hierarchy. I'm not sure where you are coming from honestly. They didn't say anything about not calling a leader from a dominance-ruled hierarchy an alpha. There are plenty of animal groups who's leaders could be called alphas.
@@eclipsewrecker Yes, I watched the video too. I was talking about your comment to msstrikerr and why you thought they were talking about alpha leadership as a whole. I don't see in their comment where they said alpha is not a thing. I can see we are interpreting their words differently. I feel like a common misconception is that people think all wolf packs consist of dominance displays and that a wolf can only be an alpha through fighting the other members of the pack. However, that is only true for mixed packs, as the video states. I feel as if msstrikerr was talking about that misconception and was glad someone finally outed it.
Thank you, Dr. Mech. It's been almost 20 years since I did Wolf Tracking through Earthwatch in Ely, MN. Dr. Mech was one of the advisers of the research project (tracked radio collared wolves 24 hrs/day via triangulation using 2 vans) I still plan to get back to Ely and revisit the International Wolf Center - Thanks for all your good wolf research and teachings.
@xiaoquan, as a dog trainer I can tell you that basing dog training on wolf behavior is like basing human child rearing on chimp behavior. I have had to help many dogs "trained" by Cesar's program recover from very serious fear & aggression issues. Cesar has been sued by his clients, & many of the dogs on his show have been euthanized. He has also been rejected by nearly every dog behavior and animal welfare organization in the world. Look up the association of pet dog trainers for real advise.
To an actual scientist, this comparison sounds really silly. The difference genetically between chimps and humans is 12 times greater than the difference genetically between dogs and wolves. By all means be as positive as you can in your training. Wolves do the same when raising their young. However, the Association of Pet Dog Trainers is wrong to say dogs don't behave like wolves, because dogs and wolves are just variations of the same species. They just don't understand much about wolf behavior.
John Smith to an actual scientist, I would think, his dismissing of a word then describing how it is completely applicable is problematic. Am I wrong? New evidence doesn’t necessarily cancel out an established term, instead its description/meaning is updated. The earth is still the earth even after we learned that it traveled around the sun. When didn’t call the earth a new name.
@@eclipsewrecker You are correct when you say alpha and leader are more or less synonymous terms. Alpha is a term used to describe the leader of a hierarchy or pecking order. The confusion comes from how one becomes alpha in the hierarchy of a particular species. With Wolves this is particularly confusing as leadership is not established by simply dominating the other members. It's established by being a good leader who makes good decisions to benefit the other members. Also, hierarchies in a pack are by gender. So there is an alpha male and an alpha female, who must approve of the alpha male. Also, beta and omega members of a pack serve an important purpose in the group as well, and have their own strategies for survival. The bottom line is Wolves and Dogs need allies to survive, and dogs, being domesticated form alliances with humans.
Mech would not agree that dogs are not closely related to wolves. Dogs are domesticated wolves. This is a scientific fact. Wild canines above a certain size need to live in packs in order to successfully hunt large game. There is a difference between a family and a pack. Western coyotes live in families where all of the offspring grow up and leave. Wolf packs are largely but not always made of family members who fit the roles needed for the pack to function properly. However, many of the offspring eventually have to leave the pack because they challenge for leadership and don't respect the pack hierarchy. The pack leaders, that is the mating pair, are respected and followed by the other pack members because they are good leaders who make good choices, not because they dominate. Bullies do not make good leaders and will not be respected and followed. Groups of canines do form hierarchies naturally and by gender. They do not see each other as equals. Managing a hierarchy is about good leadership not about dominance. Being domesticated means that dogs have found that they can get everything they need from people and this works well for them. If you have multiple dogs, especially of the same gender, you need to understand how to manage a hierarchy or there is a good chance they fight with each other, usually for your attention. Dog trainers who do not understand this are causing fights in multiple dog homes. They have cherry picked Mech's comments to create junk science and spread it all over for their own profit. The same way Milan and others have spread dominance theory, which is also junk science. Just be a good leader and provider to your dogs and respect the hierarchy that they develop by giving one slightly more attention than the other, and they will be happy and follow your lead. Dogs and wolves can mate with each other and have viable offspring. Comparing their relationship to each other to humans and chimpanzees is totally ridiculous. When one of the mating pair in a wolf pack dies, it is replaced by an unrelated mate, not one of the offspring of the remaining parent.
You have a good comment... But dominance is not junk science. It's very much real. It's just misunderstood and I think a lot of people dismiss it to disavow Cesar Milan. A human is expressing dominance over a pet dog simply by controlling it's food source.
@@saramations I was referring to physical dominance, as in bullying. Of course the pack leader controls the food. Cesar became a celebrity and got more credit than he deserved. On the other hand, he's now receiving more criticism than he deserves, as there are many, many trainers in the U.S. that preach physical dominance more than he does. Many of the techniques being used are outlawed in other countries. Proper leadership does not involve physical dominance. It is about being a good provider for pack mates. Pack mates work together without much conflict.
@@JohnSmith-lg2ie Ok, let's say that dogs are pack animals and that they need a pack leader, but how can a human be a pack leader to a dog? Like, a fish in a school of fish wouldn't consider you to be part of the school right? It is the same concept. ( I am not a trainer or anything, just someone who loves my dog but who is very confused about dominance and hierarchies and whatnot. )
@@nsh1772 Okay, so the answer is that because dogs are domesticated, they have evolved to include people in their family group, and rely on people to provide for them. They don't think that people are dogs, they just have evolved to substitute people as leaders. It's not much of an issue if you only have one dog, but if you have multiple dogs, especially of the same gender, they start to compete with each other for your attention. Or if you don't establish leadership with them properly, they may compete to become the leader. This can lead to fights between them. They don't see each other as equal, they will establish a hierarchy. It's important to understand that leadership is not about physical dominance, but is instead about respect, trust, and being a good provider. I hope this helps you to understand better.
Joshua they don’t use alpha/beta to mean the breeding pair. The patriarch and the matriarch would be the alpha pair. Too many people are upset with the misuse of “alpha” that they are trying to discredit the term. That’s bad science. In science it is typical to keep the established term and with new observations/evidence update the meaning.
@@lothara.schmal5092 yes, i agree, it is done, when the terms do not apply; when the term matches whats observed, but is mischaracterized, the description is updated. I agree that it’s good that corrections are made. This “update” reminds me of the push for ‘science’ to use new words in place of theory, fact, assumption, hypothesis, because they were commonly misused by the masses. It’s a ‘quick fix,’ but will ultimately lead to the same problem.
@@eclipsewrecker Also wrong, many scientific terms which do applie have been and are being substituted for more self-explanatory names. Alpha, being so often misuded, just happens to be one of these terms, it was replaced already.
It KILLS me to see people arguing against David using information they are unknowingly reciting from HIS research. xD You are simply regurgitating information HE gave you. Do you have /any/ idea who this man is? He is -the- pioneer of wolf study and behavior. He coined the term alpha; he wrote the book on it -- literally! This video is a discussion of his understanding after 50+ years of experience; if David is saying the info is wrong, there isn't a soul on earth which more credibility.
aaurantia the problem is that he’s dismissing the word instead of correcting its misuse. Alpha is the correct term for top of a hierarchy. The misunderstanding/misuse of the term is the real problem. If we learned tomorrow that the earth isn’t revolving around the sun but it’s instead spinning in place as the universe rotates in the opposite direction, is it still the earth? In science we use new evidence to correct descriptions of established terms. Alpha would no longer be applicable if he found out that wolf packs drew straws.
@@eclipsewrecker It would still be the earth, but we would no longer say that it "revolves", and would not change the meaning of "revolves". "Revolves" describes how it acts, just like "alpha" does. A wolf is still a wolf, but the descriptor doesn't fit so it is no longer used. In science a lot of the time words that better describe the behavior/interaction/process/etc. are used instead of trying to change the definition of a word.
@@fae3561 alpha means first in labeling, so it is established. The “revolving” has been described one way, then changed to better understand. Alpha is not the name of wolves. It was an observed position. It was erroneously described too specific. Now it has been broadened. Conflating given names and scientific terms is the problem.
@@eclipsewrecker I'm confused, are you saying that the meaning of the word "alpha" when applied to wolves means something different from the word alone because it's changed in meaning due to it's association with the wolf pack dynamic? Or are you saying that the term alpha, as it is, still sometimes applies to wolves and so it shouldn't be dismissed entirely (he did say this in the video) If you do mean the former, I disagree, because even though you say people misunderstanding the term is more of an issue than the term itself, it would be a much larger issue to address than simply using terms that make more sense. Especially since the term alpha can make sense under certain circumstances, and it's good to be able to differentiate them
did you watch the video? a wolf pack structure is more like your own family structure a breeding pair with offspring not like what is portrayed in movies
I'm saying the same thing did you read the dumbass comments they really are giving this guy a thumbs-up like oh you just made the wolf better WTF lol good comment you posted
hare666 some are the same. The problem is that instead of educating people on the correct meaning (updated description) of the term. He continued to describe a few versions and reasons of and for the alphas. Alphas are still correct. What was changed was the how and why they got those positions.
"science ruined wolves" yes. yes indeed it did. but im not talking about what the man in the video is telling us, im talking about how the old-timey, outdated and improperly conducted science (+ the people rolling with it despite facts!) have, and continue to, ruin our view of wolves. theyll always be badass creatures! and gorgeous too, but aggressive and dominant? not so
@@DragonbornCanid there is still a hierarchy much the same as in a household. There is no need for an aggressive and violent establishing of a hierarchy when the children know their place and behave; it’s only when they don’t that the parents/guardians have had to use force. For many of us there is a psychological conditioning that takes place over the developmental years from which we understand the hierarchy without the need of force. Clearly that is why wolves that did not grow up together battle for dominance.
@RoadsideMo, most wolf pups eventually separate and form their own packs around 2-3 years of age. Each wolf has the chance to become leader because each wolf can separate and find a mate.
I'm a hard core Cesar fan and I have watched every episode of his, and some of them multiple times, and I can tell you that Cesar doesn't say "the only way an "alpha" gets to the top is by fighting" like this gentleman in this video says. It's a straw man: You are mis-representing Cesar's position. Also, Cesar uses positive reinforcement all the time. It just depends on the particular case.
The job of the Alpha is to lead. Any wolf can breed in a pack, but the reason you don't see other wolves breed in most packs, is because they are siblings. In the case of a pack where the fellow pack members are not siblings, then any wolf can breed, so long as they belong to the pack. If a lone wolf threatens the pack, it would be the Alpha who steps forward. Believe it or not, a wolf pack is more democracy than anything, where the views of all wolves are heard, and the best action decided upon
@adzug Remember that even sustaining a slight injury can easily mean the death of a wild animal like a wolf that needs to be in top form. Packs need all members to help hunt...they can't really afford for any of them to be getting injured...this is why wolves instinctively avoid conflict wherever possible. It is simply too dangerous.
@xiaoquan No, this does not solve the mystery of caesars methods. You have misunderstood what he has said. He states that if a wolf is taken and placed with another unrelated "WOLF" that they may form a pack. Placing a dog, with an unrelated human is completely different and I will explain why. A dog.. is no longer a wolf. A dog does not form packs, and a dog is too domesticated to form packs. If you were to place a load of dogs somewhere, they would not start forming a pack and go off to hunt animals. Placing a dog in a home with a human, merely just means that that human is now the new carer for that dog. This dog does not grow up trying to push his way to the top and try to gain dominance and hierarchy at every given moment. You are the provider, and your dog knows this. Hierarchy does not work in different species. You can not take a dog, and place it with humans, and then say that we are part of his pack...and it boggles my mind as to why people think that makes any sense. The alpha and pack theory has been disproven, and you can not place this theory on dogs, as they have evolved so much, they don't even live the same way anymore. I don't know how you took this and somehow turned it into something that meant cesar millan was right.. but don't kid your self. It is right in front of our noses that the theory has been disproven. Trying to still stick up for it.. is like trying to still believe that the earth is flat.
When you say they WILL.. this is your opinion. There is no scientific evidence stating that the is what happens. In a book.. which i will get the reference for, it stated that even in a group of ferrel dogs, they preferred to stay with the dog with the most friends, there is no hierarchy. Most dogs will come together and then disperse and at moment. So I'm sorry but you can not state that they ARE packs. They are what ever you perceive them to be. What is a pack in your mind or what is wild in your mind could just be a group of friendly dogs. A pack is a group with hierarchy and a group that has an order as to who eats what and when. Also in a pack one of the animals would need to be in charge of controlling the recourses. They may show dominance and submission but this does not mean they are trying to determine the order of the pack. They are merely figuring each other out. This does not happen in a group of wild dogs. There are plenty of books on it. Dogs are not pack animals, they are family members. And as this has been proven, Your theory is just a belief. Also when a scientist who is the person that originally spoke of pack theory, is now saying he is wrong, why are YOU still trying to say otherwise.
It is not a fact... can you back this fact up? has it been scientifically proven? No.. but i tell you what, its been proven that is doesn't exist.. which means people that still think it does.. are believing it does.. as the evidence is right in front of you, you might as well be still saying the earth is flat.
im not going to continue to argue with you because once someone THINKS they know, you will never get through to them. Wolves ARE pack animals but dogs no longer are.. and the quicker you learn this, the better. Also its not just one scientist, its every scientist every university and every book! When you say they ARE pack animals, the reason this is your opinion is because you are using their behaviour, their past and stating you think they are pack animals. Its your opinion because the proof it there that they are not pack animals. We need to move on with this.. because the facts are right in front of you, and as I'm training as a canine behaviourist.. i would much rather use real modern facts than someone opinion. cheers
Also you missed my point, as someone said in a book even feral dogs don't form packs, they tent to stick to the dog with the most friends, so who are we to say that when he meets a dog he's thinking " ohhh another pack member".... he is just not.. i would love to see some evidence to back up what you are saying. If you can find some then i will say fair play
Boy would I love to spend some time talking with him about this. I've done a ton of research on wolves, one because I'm a wild canine nut, and the other for my own works of fiction involving wolves, and other creatures that use the pack structure. This is the first I'm hearing about this different take on the wolf pack. Though based on my research, I always thought that it wasn't so much a competition for alpha as it was the wolf somehow proving they were the best choice to lead. Quite frequently it is NOT the larger wolf that leads, so there's something more to it than just "I'm bigger and stronger than you are." As for changing pretty much everything I thought I knew about wolf packs, it has been seen that one wolf will at times be singled out, and forced to eat last. What would be the reason for this? And there does seem to be one pair that leads a pack, though that does makes sense with a family structure. The parents will often lead the family. Though what about unrelated wolves? Where do they fit into a pack? Okay, gonna stop myself there. Like I said, I'd love to talk with him about it. There's so much I'd love to bounce back and forth with him on.
When you've read "Leadership behavior in relation to dominance and reproductive status in gray wolves, Canis lupus" (Mech et al), "Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs" (Mech 1999) & "Leadership in Wolf, Canis lupus, packs." (Mech 2000) as well as his 2008 Article "What Ever Happened to the Term Alpha Wolf?" and of course the book he edited with Boitani in 2003 "Wolves..." you'll have all your answers. It's not my job to do your homework.
In short, Adam (Adam Ruins Everything - CollegeHumor) made the claim that, "Alphas" don't exist. He points to Dr. Mech as a primary source. According to this interview, Dr. Mech originally applied the term, "Alpha" incorrectly while describing the relationship between wolves. More accurately, it was a parental hierarchy. Adam does not acknowledge that Dr. Mech gives two examples where, "Alpha" would be an appropriate term.
CryingWife Yeah, Adam's video title is inaccurate. I think he was trying to debunk what most people think a wolf pack hierarchy is like and then use that to debunk human "Alpha males".
No you are just too dumb to listen to what the guy with 50yrs and who coined the term has to say. Your ego needs it to be true . But sadly for you the world isn't based on your wants or needs little man. Or maybe you just hate women that much you are hearing what you want to hear. Personally I`m betting on both being right .
Dude, you skipped over a whole bunch...He said if you have either a bunch of unrelated wolves in captivity or an overly large wolf pack with a ton of breeding pairs (which is rare and kind of unnatural ), then alphas, betas, etc can be used accurately. Otherwise...it is inaccurate...
@hyenapeptic Mech has been out there studying wolves for decades...the fact that he's spent much time living with wild wolves such as those on Ellemere Island and utilized tracking devices to get a better idea of what they are doing and where they are, this is how he knows what they actually do as opposed to what was originally thought. I really can't get my head around people contending the top wolf expert of today.
Thank you, Stacy. :) As the above comments are addressing "dogs" instead of wolves I'd like to say this: I believe that anyone who witnesses dog training that embraces the above beliefs would have a _complete_ mental shift. Everyone does the best that they can with the information they are given. Here's to a society that no longer abuses their dogs because of misinformation!:)
Benjamin Figgins alpha doesn’t mean ‘fought to the top.” It just means the top. Alpha is the correct term. All he did was educate on the different versions.
@@eclipsewrecker Alpha means fought to the top. That is exactly what it means. Which is why he's saying it's incorrect to use for natural wolf packs. It is not a synonym of "leader" or "top animal". You wouldn't use "dictator" interchangeably with leader.
@@fae3561 dictator is a specific word used only for a specific control. Alpha is used in many places for many things/positions to mean first, top, leader, and/or best. It still fits. He identified the alpha by position, then needed to broaden the definition to fit wolves in general. That’s how these scientific studies work. Identify, define, adjust when more/new information is observed
@@eclipsewrecker I should apologize. I often advocate heavily researching but failed to do so myself because of my bias. "Alpha" is the correct term and wolves still have social hierarchies. I feel like I was focusing too much on how "alpha" focused training is often damaging to animals and not based off up to date science. A lot of the people who refer to being "the alpha" do not understand how it actually works, and why it isn't appropriate for us to act the same way as wolves, and that you don't need to use intimidation to be a leader.
Even if the theory from the 70's had been accurate to all wolves, it's still a bit a sad to try to map it onto human sociology. To say that the most worthy and successful men (women need not apply) are the way they are by being the best at violence and domination is not a hopeful notion for community at any scale.
Well that should only apply to ancient humans. But I think when someone uses alpha to explain in modern times they probably mean leader. So now they generalize alpha with being the top or leader
Despite this its still true that offspring in a family/pack of wolves will form a pecking order through fighting/play etc. Furthermore wolves not of the offspring of the breeding pair that enter the pack as outsiders have to establish their place in the pack. Pecking order establishment involves mostly what is broadly known as dominance/submission behaviours. Mech here is merely stating that the 'highest' members of a wild wolf pack are almost always breeding partners, or parents.
What? So everything I was told about wolves, especially watching the documentary: Living With Wolves, was all a lie? What's next, the Easter Bunny doesn't exist? >:U I kidd. Well, I learn something new today. c: This will take a while for people/media/everything to accept this. >.
Living With Wolves is interesting because the wolf pack didn’t form naturally (Jim and Jamie Dutcher are amazing and I love their work, but they obviously didn’t give birth to those wolf puppies). Among unrelated wolves in close proximity (e.g. a lot of the circumstances in zoos and wolf centers, and also in Yellowstone at times because unrelated wolves will join packs, which is exceedingly unusual in other places). So their observations weren’t wrong, it’s just that they weren’t observations of wild wolves functioning as they normally do as was the initial hope of the project.
Well by technically wouldn't that mean they are the alpha wolf. No one seems to challenge them, they lead the pack under strong guidance, and they survived long enough to be able to reproduce. They teach their offspring to survive on instinct.
@adzug They don't move into a new pack though. Packs very rarely accept outsiders..they are closed. It is only in rare circumstances they may...and this is usually when one of the breeding pair has died and the one left needs a new mate. When they leave, they look for another lone wolf of the opposite sex and start their own pack...so they all eventually become breeders/parents. Did you not listen to Mech in this video? He states this.
just about every dog trainer (professional and hobbyist) i know really hates that dude. he traumatizes dogs into submission instead of using more humane training methods that cater to dog psychology beyond terrifying animals into submission
With DNA we now know the truth at last and that the leaders of a wolf pack are actually the parents..with their children and their older children . Based on a misconception of wolf behaviour, dog owners have often been directed to establish themselves as the Alpha or pack leader and was first introduced by David Mech (animal ecologist and wolf expert) who later, being a true scientist, as he learned more of the wolves true nature, greatly regretted the term. Wolves, in actual fact, do not hold any ambition to become the pack leader.
We heard you first thirty fucking times you blasted essentially the same comment in every goddamn reply. And you're just repeating what the video said. Fuck off.
@@Nic-xr8sd but that is totally different and has nothing to do with a related pack family. We now know that 99 % of all wolf packs are family members and all DNA related.
@@Nic-xr8sd and of course why a bull or stallion visibly looks and is so different than a steer or gelding. But again I posted about DNA showing parents as pack leaders and this has nothing to do with the original debunked flawed untrue alpha wolf study 😉
I know the definition of Alpha (and Beta). I also know that when humans hypothesized the pack theory, they hypothesized that Alphas (and Betas) earned their title (through fighting) and that there were multiple family units to a pack. However, we now know that that is not how wild wolves work. The "packs" in the wild are singular family units, and there is no fighting to establish the roles. Thus, "Alpha/Beta" titles are not applicable to wild wolves. Get it?
@Hawaiianstile How many wild wolf packs have you been out and personally studied then....and you're questioning a guy who's spent much of his life doing exactly that?
In ethology, an Alpha is the one who has priority access to limited resources. Where did we get off on such a weird track where we need to change the ethological, scientific words we use to describe behavioral traits or tendencies? If you ask me, this has way more to do with deference to peoples' emotional states than it has anything to do with scientific accuracy. Anyone who studies animal behavior should know that this term doesn't imply conflict in relation to obtaining/maintaining status.
@adzug If wolves do come into conflict on occasion, it's not common...and it's not really got anything to do with 'Alpha'. Fact is, wolves don't fight their way up some hierarchy in a pack...this is what this video is about...not what conflict wolves from different packs might get into on the rare occasion which will still have no bearing on the social structure in each anyway.
I don't understand the comments, the guy said that this can apply to groups but that typically they are simply families with the oldest male being the leader. The term isn't scientifically accurate, but the concept is basically the same
It really isn't. The term alpha was supposed to refer to a wolf that becomes a leader through dominance and aggression. Basically fighting their way to the top and beating other's into submission. What he's saying is that Instead of a leader being an alpha it's just the oldest wolf. So Instead of an alpha commanding his pack it's just the older wolf guiding them for food and safety. Obviously they're both leaders but the kind of leadership is different.
I wish he would explain why he says wolves are not in a dominance hierarchy in this video -- in another video he says that the parents usually are dominant (Channel: Pack Leader Dogs). If the only difference is that a fight doesn't occur, that sounds like "alpha" would still be the correct term in both cases.
@adzug The photo was taken in the Peak District UK. The UK has a number of similar places such as the Welsh Mountains, Lake District and the Scottish Highlands.
@hyenapeptic But he didn't fight for breeding rights. He simply left his parents and siblings and found a mate of his own and bred with her. No fighting for breeding rights involved.
Ya, i guess theories never change and there are never any new findings. No one can come up with a new way of seeing things through other more indepth study. Its such a waste of time to study anything based on the fact that once one person says something or does something they must know everything about that certain subject. Thank you for pointing this out i will now stop doing everything and forget all the university training i have and live off unemployment insurance.
@Canislupess thats what i meant though , when they mature they move on to start their own pack. inbreeding will weaken the genetic makeup and when they do they might look for a lone wolf and want to avoid confrontation that can lead to injury or death but the point is abundance or lack of. populations of animals and food are dynamic. theres a natural economy going on and thru lack of access confrontation becomes inevitable. for exp there were a rash of bear attacks on an island
Just need to clear up a little confusion here if any one can answer the question. Alright.. So the Breeding male and Female get their positions through default.. according to Mech over here right? So when they mate approximately.. they have a large litter.. What determines the next Breeding pair. If there isn't a dominance conflict.? In addition to that. There have been studies of members of a Pack respecting and pinning ears, lowering tail and giving respect. and what about fighting themselves?
I personal can understand now why it's an inaccurate term however if someone like me is used to the name Alpha and is comfortable with it then I see no reason one can't use it.
@adzug Why would he be competing with other males? Didn't Mech state that a pack consists of parents and offspring? Why would a son try to knock his dad off top spot to mate with mum? Such inbreeding wouldn't do the species Offspring leave the pack by the age of 3 to find a mate of their own.
Something I'm surprised more people haven't caught on to here is that while he is saying the dominance hierarchy does not exist in a normal wolf pack family he is saying that it still exists in an unnatural pack that is not family and has been thrown together randomly....the way we do with our dogs at home...think about it. I find it funny how positive only trainers use this video as a way to say the dominance hierarchy has been "debunked" when all it's really doing is confirming its existence. Maybe something people should realize is that the purely positive movement has dominated the current world of training, punishing those who do not use their approved methods.... Remember this, the smartest thing the devil ever did was convince everyone that he didn't exist.
Don't mess up things. Hierarchy structure comes up when there is a notable lack of resources. Captive wolves are lacking on space, thus they adopt the dominance system because they can't settle families. So... family is their natural way of life, dominance is the emergency one. Which resource is the one our dogs in our homes are missing? Don't trust people who tell you about the "leader of the pack". Look for professionals, who have studied scientist sources. Rather than the Cesar Millan language they will be speaking of things like conductism, cognitive-emotional, positive and negative rewards and punishments, target, step learning, stress management, neotecnia, timing, behavior capture... When I go to the doctor I like the fact that he is product of the science. Modern science. The modern training methods for dogs are conductism and the cognitive-emotional.
+Abigail Sandifer Dogs are not wolves. Dogs are not "pack animals". They are social, but are not pack animals. There is no such thing as "purely positive" trainer. But there are trainers who don't use pain, intimidation and fear .
Dr Mech does not say dominance doesn't exist but rather the old idea that a wolf becomes an alpha through physical force and violence in beating other "alphas" doesn't exist in most natural cases of wolf packs.
Then whats the point of Alpha term in a familiar captive pack? When you have the breeding pair, and their offspring keep displaying dominance and submission to each other. Do you rank them in an hierachy? Are they "fighting" for their place in it?
....also parents / breeding pairs will also show their dominance to their offspring - but rarely through fighting or similar activities. They mostly just display 'dominant' body language.
@xiaoquan I see where you are going, but you are assuming that dogs and wolves are the same. They are not. Subsequent studies on domestic feral and pet dogs show that their behavioural traits and social behaviour in particular are markedly different to wolves. They don't form strict hierarchies. Dogs are really pack animals, in the technical sense of the term. Trying to compare dogs to wolves is like comparing chimpanzees to bonobos, or humans to chimpanzees.
@hyenapeptic Parents discourage their offspring from mating with each other thats why....all efforts have to go into one litter. by the time young wolves are 2-3 years old, most left their parent pack to find a mate of their own. Would it really work for the genetic health of the species if a son was to knock his dad off top spot and mate with mum or a sister? Not really...and since packs consist of mum, dad and offspring, it wouldn't work very well that way.
@Ignozi what you think humans are so much higher up then wolves? why not apply this term to humans? everything a wolf has we hav so why not the same terms?
Dr. Mech, if you have two distinct packs join each other, or the "dominant breeder who can fight well" take over an existing pack then what would you describe the behavior/type of winning breeder?
@BluOceanBubbles which brings me back to my first point that i never heard of wolf packs consisting of a pair of parents and their children. i have always understood wolf packs as having numerous unrelated members.
I understand that Alpha can be described as the strongest most fit one that took charge of the group by force but i thought Alpha also just meant leader in general. Like what Dr. Mech said about the Breeder Male wolf, considering he is the father wolf, he is probably the oldest and most fit and a wolf that helps take care of the pack and protects it, he would naturally be in charge seeing as there is noone else suitable. Doesn't that make him the natural leader wolf or natural Alpha wolf in a way as well? Or does Alpha have to mean leadership by force?
I think it is important to understand that in science using the proper term helps to remove ambiguity from statements. There are a lot of examples where terms overlap disciplines that use different definitions and confusion can arise. In the video he is explaining how the term alpha has been defined and used in the past because of theories that have since been disproven. Since new animal theories exist it is appropriate to use a different term to describe the "leader" of the pack, because "alpha" carries with it the old definition from old and out of date animal pack behavioral theory.
@@joeracer302 to say that he was the first ever to call the male leader is a bit far fetched, maybe he did maybe he didn't. Or I misunderstood but I don't think he was the one that coined phrase.
Why, and in what way, is it wrong to use the greek letter "alpha" to represent a wolf? Am I "right" or "wrong" calling a helium-4 nucleus an "alpha" particle?
He literally explains why. "Alpha wolf" comes from an old outdated concept that wolves fought for dominance which is not the case in the wild. What we call "Alpha wolves" are simply the the parents of the wolf family. Calling them "alphas" not only provides zero additional information, it is also a misuse of the term and misrepresents the true nature of wolf pack structures.
@@taoliu3949 So if "Alpha wolves" are simply the parents of the wolf family, why can't we call the parents of the wolf family "Alpha wolves"? When the term "Alpha Particle" was coined there were a lot of things we didn't understand about quarks (and I believe there still are). Do we need to rename the Alpha Particles just because we learned something new? Do you believe we understand everything about wolves now?
@@matseriksson8177 Do you call human parents "alphas"? What about doe mothers? If not then why are you using the term for wolves? It offers zero context/additional information than simply calling them the "parents" or father/mother. "Alpha wolves" comes from an outdated belief about wolves that's been thoroughly debunked. By saying "alpha" you imply that the wolf attained its position of dominance through fighting, which is not how wolves function in the wild. The term is used in very specific ways in biology. It's a descriptor, not a proper noun.
@BluOceanBubbles i understand him, i just find it very hard to believe that any creature would relinquish both feeding and breeding rights to a weaker individual.
It sounds hilarious when you put it like that, but... yeah, actually. Mostly. And when the offspring isn't/aren't they usually leave or get kicked out.
Props to Dr Mech for being a true scientist being willing to take new information and reform his opinions.
Teekoness, yes! I agree. Mr. Mech is a breath of fresh air. I love this guy , he is THE one and only authority concerning wolves and wolf research, as far as I'm concerned. He is leagues above all the so called wolf experts who do nothing but regurge the empty bull shit they hear on 'Animal Planet.'
science-tist* 0:41
The picture he gives us is only half the story.
Because the claim he is making is that a wolf pack is literally just a family, where the leader is the one who gave birth to his followers. But that doesn't mean that all wolf packs are only families. How do wolves find mates, because they cannot procreate with each other. Does it mean that the male wolves leave the pack and find a single female wolf and then form their own pack? This is only part of the story. Because those same wolves who leave their group can easily go join other packs and what's the dynamics then? In those situations fights will happen, but what is the hierarchical structure in those other packs where family isn't binding the whole group?
What about research about packs/groups that aren't formed by families, but rather different wolves, from different families? Because there are also videos and information that indicates that in such packs, fights for dominance are real and according to claims by researchers, only the alpha wolf is allowed to mate, so in those sorts of situations, do they tyrannically take over the whole pack, or what is the situation then?
This doesn't change how we should approach the hierarchy of a pack. You can still become a leader without raising a dog from birth. This just explains how it happens naturally in the wild.
@@123natemans It absolutely _does_ change how we see the hierarchy of a pack. Because we see now that our ideas were far too rigid to accurately represent how packs exist in nature. Natural hierarchy and dominance is not the same as social conditioning done by humans.
So more commonly, it's just a wolf family.
Exactly!
With DNA we now know the leaders of a wolf pack are actually the parents..and their children and their older children .
Justin Tun Basically.
AAAnt M Nah they get kicked out
Most of the time, yes. Not all the time though. Nuance does exist! And so does the dominance hierarchy. Which has not yet been refuted.
as a dog trainer, i'm trying VERY hard to spread this information. it's amazing the turn around dogs can have once they're shown their boundaries in a non-aggressive 'alpha' way.
Elle J. Winsett I’m glad somebody is saying this. Alpha is the correct term, it’s people’s misunderstanding of it that is the problem.
Please read a book
OF WOLF And MAN what am I getting wrong?
@@eclipsewrecker There is no alpha there is no reason to pretend that you are a Wolf
OF WOLF And MAN I’m a wolf? I think you forgot your own name.
The researcher who came up with "Alpha" for wolves in his book, he tried to reverse what he published but it was already too late.
The same thing happened to Darwin!
@@Zach-sg5uureally?? What did he say?
Call it what you will, but i have learned with my own pack that you should be your dogs best friend rather than a feared boss.
Hey I watch your videos! Nice seeing you here haha! I totally agree.
Jacob Apodaca
Thanks man
I agree. The same could be said about family. Do you respect you're abusive dad or your loving grandfather?
When you do something wrong, do you dread the beating or do you dread the disappointment?
I always hated getting hit. It made me feel weak and worthless. It didn't change my behavior and really made me more rebellious, angry, and hateful. What I really felt made me change my ways was when my grandfather picked me up from the PD after I was caught shoplifting. I was terrified. I didn't care about the cops, I didn't care about my dads belt. He said to me, "you know this makes us all look bad?" I cared about that. Then he took me out for Chinese and we talked about it.
You can't do all that with a dog but you can mimic it and it works. Same as it worked for me, the simplified way for a dog works the same.
Wonderful story!
Saeed Ed even in Human hierarchies the alphas tend to be nurturing in some way.
hoo man, you would not believe what some people will do to say this guy is a lone nut. science always discovers new data constantly, so how is it this guy is suddenly a nut job? probably cause people dont want to admit they are just jerks.
Because he said right off the bat that would be a hunting season needed if wolves recovered in the US. I remember him saying that about 1980. Lots of people didn't want to hear it.
@@scottmontgomery4537 could you say that while not having a stroke please
Isaac Shepard I wouldn’t call him a nut, but he’s wrong about the alpha term. It still applies. He proves it with everything he said after. It’s a universal term. All he did was describe different versions and different reasons of and for the alphas.
In science new information, observations, and evidence doesn’t usually call for a new term to be used but typically a new description of the established term. Correct the misunderstanding of what alphas are.
@@eclipsewrecker not exactly. Scientists change terminology because the word used doesn't imply the correct meaning. In this case, a new term was developed because it implies a more specific meaning. Alpha just meant leader. Breeding now implies they are the leader because they are the parent of most of the pack. Making sure the terminology is better isn't just good for the scientists, it's also good for science communication.
@@alajononon you stated that a new term is used because it needed a more specific meaning, but the discovery lead to a broader meaning. Alpha still applies.
The pack was observed. The observer/researcher identified the positions in the pack, then defined it by the behaviors. When the observer/researcher identified the positions in wild packs they realized that their original defining behaviors were not consistent. Redefine. No new term is necessary. This was an emotional plea from this man, who felt responsible misleading people who acted by his definitions. It was not scientific at all.
Dr. Without a doubt,you are the besting the field! We have indeed learned much in 35 years with more to come. Thanks for all your time and dedicated focus over the years
Dr. David Mech is one of the foremost if not the foremost experts on wolves, having spent over 30+ yrs studying the wolf, how intricate a wolf pack is, wolf prey and other areas. Dr. Mech once said that when a wolf pack makes a kill they eat nearly everything, all that could be left are some bones, the stomach contents, the lower jaw, the backbone and that is it, they are unable to digest everything!
You are not the "Pack Leader" or "Alpha" to your dog. You are the parent.
A dog will often mimic its owner's behavior. Disciplining or yelling at your dog when they misbehave sometimes won't work. Maybe their attitude towards YOU might change, but they may just end up mimicing you, making them loud and aggressive towards other dogs or humans.
Je viens d'apprendre que j'étais mère de trois enfants donc, merci pour la nouvelle ! Sérieusement quelles conneries il faut pas entendre, vous essayez de déformer les propos de monsieur Mech. D'ailleurs, il serait plus logique de dire qu'une meute de chiens, par exemple la mienne, ou aucun chien n'est apparenté, se rapproche d'une meute artificielle contrôlée par l'homme et où pourrait donc régner une hiérarchie de domination comme dans la meute de loup captives.
Do you have proof of this or is this just a gut feeling
@@liamkerr7183 He's just spewing opinion. A dog does not see you as its parent. No matter what delusions people have about being a dog daddy, dog mommy, or having a fur baby. The dog knows its own mother, and senses it is like itself - a dog as well. Dogs intuit that we are a different species altogether from them. If they didn't know they were dogs, they'd make bad pets, as dogs who lack formative months of socialization with their parents and littermates generally do. What recent research actually suggests is that our relationship with dogs is not like the relationship of a dog and its parent, or like that of a dog and any other rival dog. It is unique.
I honestly think some people are just too stubborn and set in their ways to realize that the way they train their dogs is wrong. It surprises me because hurting and embarrasing your dog shouldnt be something you want to do. Its unfortunate people want to blind eye new found research and treat mans best friend with aggression. One day your dog might turn on you and I wouldnt blame him.
Kelsey Hill
One In The Chamber It does, actually, since many bad dog trainers use the alpha myth as basis for their training.
@@Keznen it's not a myth
@@liamkerr7183 Yes it is.
@@liamkerr7183 even the guy who based his original research on it admits that the "alpha" model isnt an accurate representation of natural hierarchy in wolves. Please look at the research and listen to more experts instead of making baseless claims based on your own observations
I allowed an 'alpha' trainer to work with my dog for one session for territorial aggression. Never again.
The dog got worse?
@@ModernLady the guys who do it typically abuse the dogs into submission
hamstersniffer well don’t let someone’s misunderstanding of what the alpha is cancel the word. You’re still the alpha in your relationship (if there are others there), but it is up to you how you behave.
@@eclipsewrecker you just hate science don't you.
@@lloydchristmas4547 it’s actually the opposite. Alpha is a term used throughout science to denote the first and/or first in a hierarchy. Limiting it to physically dominate is not keeping with the science. You seem to think that I disagree with the differences in the behaviors of most wolves in the wild compared to those in captivity. I don’t.
I see so many people screw up dog training by being aggressive, timid and anxious. I also see people completely fail their dog by treating them like a prince/princess. We all know that 99% of us get dogs as cute and cuddly living dolls that exhibit emotions but can't speak lol. This is why you need to train your dog to recognize your tone, words and body language. You most definitely should use a strong tone and body language that shows you are in control. I've trained so many "difficult" breeds like Shiba inu, chow chow and shar pei's and these dogs lose their confidence in your ability to take care of them and any anxiety producing situations if you do not take control of the situation. I know the term "alpha" is misused a lot but when people hear explanations like in this video, they think it means that everything that experienced trainers have learned about dogs is moot and that you can just be your dog's best friend instead of protector and caretaker. Unless your dog is feeding and taking care of itself, it will always look to you to take care of them and it is the humans job to reassure them. That's what being "alpha" is. Not beating your dog into fearing you.
Very well said!
1:50 I wonder if part of the reason this thinking came about was because they observed wolves in captivity instead of the wild.
I was curious of the same thing
Yes they did study on captured wolves
Yes, studies were conducted on captive wolves in the 60s. Because these wolves were unrelated, there was a lot of conflict. The scientists then deducted that wolves form linear hierarchies in packs based on dominance. Dog trainers then took this and used it in their training. However, the studies were flawed by the original scientists themselves, because they later discovered that none of their observations were replicable in the wild. To this day, some dog trainers still hold on to their belief that the only way to train a dog is by dominating them, even when all of the theories have been debunked decades ago by those who created them, and modern research has found no evidence whatsoever that animals learn better through punishment than through positive reinforcement.
Just as quick recap on the dominance belief :)
Kathy L can we please be honest about this? Alpha is the correct term for the top of the hierarchy. What is wrong is the misunderstanding and the misuse of the term. All he did in this video is describe different versions of the alphas and how they got the role.
Doesn't that still apply, even if it was in captivity that just means the wolves adapted based on being in a controlled environment. Arent dogs in the same boat? Since they are domesticated and not roaming in the wild wouldn't there be new adaptations?
He is now undoing what he had done, in his innocence. Hold your punches for the people who don't bother educating themselves enough about wolf and dog behavior to notice that these terms are no longer used by wolf researchers.
god, someone finally said that. Thank you. I'm tired of trying to explain it to people.
msstrikerr explaining what? The misuse of what alpha means? Or that we aren’t supposed to use the correct term for top of a hierarchy?
Not just anybody said that, but the creator of the term alpha said that.
I like how he clarified that it's only when there are more than one breeding pair involved that wolves will establish a hierarchy through dominance. Alpha wolves still exist, just not in packs that only consist of one breeding pair and their pups.
@@eclipsewrecker I'm pretty sure they are explaining why most wolf packs don't have an "Alpha, Beta" hierarchy. I'm not sure where you are coming from honestly. They didn't say anything about not calling a leader from a dominance-ruled hierarchy an alpha.
There are plenty of animal groups who's leaders could be called alphas.
@@chromiakocosmos8888 he explained that there was still a hierarchy. Alpha meaning first. He’s trying to correct his error in specificity.
@@eclipsewrecker Yes, I watched the video too. I was talking about your comment to msstrikerr and why you thought they were talking about alpha leadership as a whole. I don't see in their comment where they said alpha is not a thing.
I can see we are interpreting their words differently. I feel like a common misconception is that people think all wolf packs consist of dominance displays and that a wolf can only be an alpha through fighting the other members of the pack.
However, that is only true for mixed packs, as the video states. I feel as if msstrikerr was talking about that misconception and was glad someone finally outed it.
Thank you, Dr. Mech. It's been almost 20 years since I did Wolf Tracking through Earthwatch in Ely, MN. Dr. Mech was one of the advisers of the research project (tracked radio collared wolves 24 hrs/day via triangulation using 2 vans) I still plan to get back to Ely and revisit the International Wolf Center - Thanks for all your good wolf research and teachings.
@xiaoquan, as a dog trainer I can tell you that basing dog training on wolf behavior is like basing human child rearing on chimp behavior. I have had to help many dogs "trained" by Cesar's program recover from very serious fear & aggression issues. Cesar has been sued by his clients, & many of the dogs on his show have been euthanized. He has also been rejected by nearly every dog behavior and animal welfare organization in the world. Look up the association of pet dog trainers for real advise.
So ceasar is a bad dog whisper?
To an actual scientist, this comparison sounds really silly. The difference genetically between chimps and humans is 12 times greater than the difference genetically between dogs and wolves. By all means be as positive as you can in your training. Wolves do the same when raising their young. However, the Association of Pet Dog Trainers is wrong to say dogs don't behave like wolves, because dogs and wolves are just variations of the same species. They just don't understand much about wolf behavior.
John Smith to an actual scientist, I would think, his dismissing of a word then describing how it is completely applicable is problematic. Am I wrong? New evidence doesn’t necessarily cancel out an established term, instead its description/meaning is updated. The earth is still the earth even after we learned that it traveled around the sun. When didn’t call the earth a new name.
@@eclipsewrecker
You are correct when you say alpha and leader are more or less synonymous terms. Alpha is a term used to describe the leader of a hierarchy or pecking order. The confusion comes from how one becomes alpha in the hierarchy of a particular species. With Wolves this is particularly confusing as leadership is not established by simply dominating the other members. It's established by being a good leader who makes good decisions to benefit the other members. Also, hierarchies in a pack are by gender. So there is an alpha male and an alpha female, who must approve of the alpha male. Also, beta and omega members of a pack serve an important purpose in the group as well, and have their own strategies for survival. The bottom line is Wolves and Dogs need allies to survive, and dogs, being domesticated form alliances with humans.
John Smith I agree, except that an alpha is defined as one with power or influence over the other on a group.
Thank god this information is getting out there in a more accessible medium. Thank you, David! :D
Mech would not agree that dogs are not closely related to wolves. Dogs are domesticated wolves. This is a scientific fact. Wild canines above a certain size need to live in packs in order to successfully hunt large game. There is a difference between a family and a pack. Western coyotes live in families where all of the offspring grow up and leave. Wolf packs are largely but not always made of family members who fit the roles needed for the pack to function properly. However, many of the offspring eventually have to leave the pack because they challenge for leadership and don't respect the pack hierarchy. The pack leaders, that is the mating pair, are respected and followed by the other pack members because they are good leaders who make good choices, not because they dominate. Bullies do not make good leaders and will not be respected and followed. Groups of canines do form hierarchies naturally and by gender. They do not see each other as equals. Managing a hierarchy is about good leadership not about dominance. Being domesticated means that dogs have found that they can get everything they need from people and this works well for them. If you have multiple dogs, especially of the same gender, you need to understand how to manage a hierarchy or there is a good chance they fight with each other, usually for your attention. Dog trainers who do not understand this are causing fights in multiple dog homes. They have cherry picked Mech's comments to create junk science and spread it all over for their own profit. The same way Milan and others have spread dominance theory, which is also junk science. Just be a good leader and provider to your dogs and respect the hierarchy that they develop by giving one slightly more attention than the other, and they will be happy and follow your lead. Dogs and wolves can mate with each other and have viable offspring. Comparing their relationship to each other to humans and chimpanzees is totally ridiculous. When one of the mating pair in a wolf pack dies, it is replaced by an unrelated mate, not one of the offspring of the remaining parent.
You have a good comment...
But dominance is not junk science. It's very much real. It's just misunderstood and I think a lot of people dismiss it to disavow Cesar Milan.
A human is expressing dominance over a pet dog simply by controlling it's food source.
@@saramations
I was referring to physical dominance, as in bullying. Of course the pack leader controls the food. Cesar became a celebrity and got more credit than he deserved. On the other hand, he's now receiving more criticism than he deserves, as there are many, many trainers in the U.S. that preach physical dominance more than he does. Many of the techniques being used are outlawed in other countries. Proper leadership does not involve physical dominance. It is about being a good provider for pack mates. Pack mates work together without much conflict.
@@JohnSmith-lg2ie Ok, let's say that dogs are pack animals and that they need a pack leader, but how can a human be a pack leader to a dog? Like, a fish in a school of fish wouldn't consider you to be part of the school right? It is the same concept. ( I am not a trainer or anything, just someone who loves my dog but who is very confused about dominance and hierarchies and whatnot. )
@@nsh1772
Okay, so the answer is that because dogs are domesticated, they have evolved to include people in their family group, and rely on people to provide for them. They don't think that people are dogs, they just have evolved to substitute people as leaders. It's not much of an issue if you only have one dog, but if you have multiple dogs, especially of the same gender, they start to compete with each other for your attention. Or if you don't establish leadership with them properly, they may compete to become the leader. This can lead to fights between them. They don't see each other as equal, they will establish a hierarchy. It's important to understand that leadership is not about physical dominance, but is instead about respect, trust, and being a good provider. I hope this helps you to understand better.
good vid, Matriarch and Patriarch are seeming much more appropriate then Alpha/beta
Joshua they don’t use alpha/beta to mean the breeding pair. The patriarch and the matriarch would be the alpha pair.
Too many people are upset with the misuse of “alpha” that they are trying to discredit the term. That’s bad science. In science it is typical to keep the established term and with new observations/evidence update the meaning.
@@eclipsewrecker Scientists are very prone to updating terms actually, specially biologists (thank God)
@@lothara.schmal5092 yes, i agree, it is done, when the terms do not apply; when the term matches whats observed, but is mischaracterized, the description is updated.
I agree that it’s good that corrections are made. This “update” reminds me of the push for ‘science’ to use new words in place of theory, fact, assumption, hypothesis, because they were commonly misused by the masses. It’s a ‘quick fix,’ but will ultimately lead to the same problem.
@@eclipsewrecker Also wrong, many scientific terms which do applie have been and are being substituted for more self-explanatory names.
Alpha, being so often misuded, just happens to be one of these terms, it was replaced already.
The Conservatives who still use “alpha” and “beta” to describe themselves and others need to watch this video, right now.
for real
I mock anyone that uses the term alpha or beta and tell them to go howl for their wolf pack if they think they are such an alpha wolf.
Why? This is now about how languages function, not so much wolves. The term is coined and used.
Exactly
@@two-facedclown2994 the right hate science
It KILLS me to see people arguing against David using information they are unknowingly reciting from HIS research. xD You are simply regurgitating information HE gave you.
Do you have /any/ idea who this man is? He is -the- pioneer of wolf study and behavior. He coined the term alpha; he wrote the book on it -- literally!
This video is a discussion of his understanding after 50+ years of experience; if David is saying the info is wrong, there isn't a soul on earth which more credibility.
aaurantia the problem is that he’s dismissing the word instead of correcting its misuse. Alpha is the correct term for top of a hierarchy. The misunderstanding/misuse of the term is the real problem. If we learned tomorrow that the earth isn’t revolving around the sun but it’s instead spinning in place as the universe rotates in the opposite direction, is it still the earth? In science we use new evidence to correct descriptions of established terms. Alpha would no longer be applicable if he found out that wolf packs drew straws.
@@eclipsewrecker It would still be the earth, but we would no longer say that it "revolves", and would not change the meaning of "revolves".
"Revolves" describes how it acts, just like "alpha" does. A wolf is still a wolf, but the descriptor doesn't fit so it is no longer used.
In science a lot of the time words that better describe the behavior/interaction/process/etc. are used instead of trying to change the definition of a word.
@@fae3561 alpha means first in labeling, so it is established. The “revolving” has been described one way, then changed to better understand. Alpha is not the name of wolves. It was an observed position. It was erroneously described too specific. Now it has been broadened.
Conflating given names and scientific terms is the problem.
@@eclipsewrecker I'm confused, are you saying that the meaning of the word "alpha" when applied to wolves means something different from the word alone because it's changed in meaning due to it's association with the wolf pack dynamic? Or are you saying that the term alpha, as it is, still sometimes applies to wolves and so it shouldn't be dismissed entirely (he did say this in the video)
If you do mean the former, I disagree, because even though you say people misunderstanding the term is more of an issue than the term itself, it would be a much larger issue to address than simply using terms that make more sense. Especially since the term alpha can make sense under certain circumstances, and it's good to be able to differentiate them
@@eclipsewrecker non scientist layman gets angry at scientist. news at 12
did you watch the video? a wolf pack structure is more like your own family structure a breeding pair with offspring not like what is portrayed in movies
OF WOLF And MAN correct, but that doesn’t negate the alpha term. It helps us understand that position better.
@@eclipsewrecker And what we are saying is that position does not exist at all
OF WOLF And MAN oh I must have missed that. Sorry. I am so confused now. He likened it to a mother and a father, didn’t he?
@@eclipsewrecker Yes he made the association with mother and father to show that you do not have to be dominant
OF WOLF And MAN an alpha is dominate through power or influence, much like parents.
ppl whining about this look like the ppl whining about feathered dromeosaurs lmao "science ruined wolves"
I'm saying the same thing did you read the dumbass comments they really are giving this guy a thumbs-up like oh you just made the wolf better WTF lol good comment you posted
hare666 some are the same. The problem is that instead of educating people on the correct meaning (updated description) of the term.
He continued to describe a few versions and reasons of and for the alphas. Alphas are still correct. What was changed was the how and why they got those positions.
"science ruined wolves"
yes. yes indeed it did.
but im not talking about what the man in the video is telling us, im talking about how the old-timey, outdated and improperly conducted science (+ the people rolling with it despite facts!) have, and continue to, ruin our view of wolves. theyll always be badass creatures! and gorgeous too, but aggressive and dominant? not so
also, you mean to tell me dromeosaurus didnt have feathers o.o
well shit
@@DragonbornCanid there is still a hierarchy much the same as in a household. There is no need for an aggressive and violent establishing of a hierarchy when the children know their place and behave; it’s only when they don’t that the parents/guardians have had to use force.
For many of us there is a psychological conditioning that takes place over the developmental years from which we understand the hierarchy without the need of force.
Clearly that is why wolves that did not grow up together battle for dominance.
@RoadsideMo, most wolf pups eventually separate and form their own packs around 2-3 years of age. Each wolf has the chance to become leader because each wolf can separate and find a mate.
This debunks cesar millan and all punitive based training!
I'm a hard core Cesar fan and I have watched every episode of his, and some of them multiple times, and I can tell you that Cesar doesn't say "the only way an "alpha" gets to the top is by fighting" like this gentleman in this video says.
It's a straw man: You are mis-representing Cesar's position. Also, Cesar uses positive reinforcement all the time. It just depends on the particular case.
Cesar corrects dogs the same way the breeding male may correct his offspring.
@@SomeGuy-so3kk type on RUclips "mother dog corrects puppies" and you will see Cesar corrects dogs the way their MOM would!
Cool to see someone able to admit a mistake or even if not a mistake a lack of knowledge in the past.
The job of the Alpha is to lead. Any wolf can breed in a pack, but the reason you don't see other wolves breed in most packs, is because they are siblings. In the case of a pack where the fellow pack members are not siblings, then any wolf can breed, so long as they belong to the pack. If a lone wolf threatens the pack, it would be the Alpha who steps forward. Believe it or not, a wolf pack is more democracy than anything, where the views of all wolves are heard, and the best action decided upon
@adzug Remember that even sustaining a slight injury can easily mean the death of a wild animal like a wolf that needs to be in top form. Packs need all members to help hunt...they can't really afford for any of them to be getting injured...this is why wolves instinctively avoid conflict wherever possible. It is simply too dangerous.
Able to recognize he might have been wrong, and in that field, that is integrity, they don't teach that at university
Thanks a lot from Spain Dr David. It´s very important for our
@xiaoquan No, this does not solve the mystery of caesars methods. You have misunderstood what he has said. He states that if a wolf is taken and placed with another unrelated "WOLF" that they may form a pack. Placing a dog, with an unrelated human is completely different and I will explain why. A dog.. is no longer a wolf. A dog does not form packs, and a dog is too domesticated to form packs. If you were to place a load of dogs somewhere, they would not start forming a pack and go off to hunt animals. Placing a dog in a home with a human, merely just means that that human is now the new carer for that dog. This dog does not grow up trying to push his way to the top and try to gain dominance and hierarchy at every given moment. You are the provider, and your dog knows this. Hierarchy does not work in different species. You can not take a dog, and place it with humans, and then say that we are part of his pack...and it boggles my mind as to why people think that makes any sense. The alpha and pack theory has been disproven, and you can not place this theory on dogs, as they have evolved so much, they don't even live the same way anymore. I don't know how you took this and somehow turned it into something that meant cesar millan was right.. but don't kid your self. It is right in front of our noses that the theory has been disproven. Trying to still stick up for it.. is like trying to still believe that the earth is flat.
When you say they WILL.. this is your opinion. There is no scientific evidence stating that the is what happens. In a book.. which i will get the reference for, it stated that even in a group of ferrel dogs, they preferred to stay with the dog with the most friends, there is no hierarchy. Most dogs will come together and then disperse and at moment. So I'm sorry but you can not state that they ARE packs. They are what ever you perceive them to be. What is a pack in your mind or what is wild in your mind could just be a group of friendly dogs. A pack is a group with hierarchy and a group that has an order as to who eats what and when. Also in a pack one of the animals would need to be in charge of controlling the recourses. They may show dominance and submission but this does not mean they are trying to determine the order of the pack. They are merely figuring each other out. This does not happen in a group of wild dogs. There are plenty of books on it. Dogs are not pack animals, they are family members. And as this has been proven, Your theory is just a belief. Also when a scientist who is the person that originally spoke of pack theory, is now saying he is wrong, why are YOU still trying to say otherwise.
It is not a fact... can you back this fact up? has it been scientifically proven? No.. but i tell you what, its been proven that is doesn't exist.. which means people that still think it does.. are believing it does.. as the evidence is right in front of you, you might as well be still saying the earth is flat.
im not going to continue to argue with you because once someone THINKS they know, you will never get through to them. Wolves ARE pack animals but dogs no longer are.. and the quicker you learn this, the better. Also its not just one scientist, its every scientist every university and every book! When you say they ARE pack animals, the reason this is your opinion is because you are using their behaviour, their past and stating you think they are pack animals. Its your opinion because the proof it there that they are not pack animals. We need to move on with this.. because the facts are right in front of you, and as I'm training as a canine behaviourist.. i would much rather use real modern facts than someone opinion. cheers
Also you missed my point, as someone said in a book even feral dogs don't form packs, they tent to stick to the dog with the most friends, so who are we to say that when he meets a dog he's thinking " ohhh another pack member".... he is just not.. i would love to see some evidence to back up what you are saying. If you can find some then i will say fair play
www.amazon.co.uk/The-truth-about-wolves-dogs/dp/1845844270
Every gatcha be Punching the air rn
Boy would I love to spend some time talking with him about this. I've done a ton of research on wolves, one because I'm a wild canine nut, and the other for my own works of fiction involving wolves, and other creatures that use the pack structure. This is the first I'm hearing about this different take on the wolf pack.
Though based on my research, I always thought that it wasn't so much a competition for alpha as it was the wolf somehow proving they were the best choice to lead. Quite frequently it is NOT the larger wolf that leads, so there's something more to it than just "I'm bigger and stronger than you are."
As for changing pretty much everything I thought I knew about wolf packs, it has been seen that one wolf will at times be singled out, and forced to eat last. What would be the reason for this? And there does seem to be one pair that leads a pack, though that does makes sense with a family structure. The parents will often lead the family. Though what about unrelated wolves? Where do they fit into a pack?
Okay, gonna stop myself there. Like I said, I'd love to talk with him about it. There's so much I'd love to bounce back and forth with him on.
When you've read "Leadership behavior in relation to dominance and reproductive status in gray wolves, Canis lupus" (Mech et al), "Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs" (Mech 1999) & "Leadership in Wolf, Canis lupus, packs." (Mech 2000) as well as his 2008 Article "What Ever Happened to the Term Alpha Wolf?" and of course the book he edited with Boitani in 2003 "Wolves..." you'll have all your answers. It's not my job to do your homework.
musicofnote1 all of that is good, but none of it negates the term alpha. It only better describes what it means to be that role.
And thus the PAU bro-science gets a final bitchslap it so wholeheartedly deserves;-)
Fluffybrute Sorry I ment PUA;-)
+Fluffybrute pickup artists
stalin was a hero
Exactly!
@@JamesBateman11 not everyone you disagree with are not communist
Props to anyone who came here to do their own research on what Adam from CollegeHumor said.
In short, Adam (Adam Ruins Everything - CollegeHumor) made the claim that, "Alphas" don't exist. He points to Dr. Mech as a primary source. According to this interview, Dr. Mech originally applied the term, "Alpha" incorrectly while describing the relationship between wolves. More accurately, it was a parental hierarchy. Adam does not acknowledge that Dr. Mech gives two examples where, "Alpha" would be an appropriate term.
CryingWife Yeah, Adam's video title is inaccurate. I think he was trying to debunk what most people think a wolf pack hierarchy is like and then use that to debunk human "Alpha males".
Most people won't reach the end of Mech's video where he confirms that Alphas do indeed exist; especially in captivity and in complex breeding packs
Tyler Roll he said "if ever" implying that is the only way it is possible if it ever has even occured
@@agaytroll4903 so..... They exist as an exception, not as a standard. Good facts
"The term "alpha wolf" if incorrect, ..... unless it's a female, then you can call her that."
Something is wrong here...
No you are just too dumb to listen to what the guy with 50yrs and who coined the term has to say. Your ego needs it to be true . But sadly for you the world isn't based on your wants or needs little man.
Or maybe you just hate women that much you are hearing what you want to hear.
Personally I`m betting on both being right .
Dude, you skipped over a whole bunch...He said if you have either a bunch of unrelated wolves in captivity or an overly large wolf pack with a ton of breeding pairs (which is rare and kind of unnatural ), then alphas, betas, etc can be used accurately. Otherwise...it is inaccurate...
@hyenapeptic Mech has been out there studying wolves for decades...the fact that he's spent much time living with wild wolves such as those on Ellemere Island and utilized tracking devices to get a better idea of what they are doing and where they are, this is how he knows what they actually do as opposed to what was originally thought. I really can't get my head around people contending the top wolf expert of today.
Thank you, Stacy. :)
As the above comments are addressing "dogs" instead of wolves I'd like to say this:
I believe that anyone who witnesses dog training that embraces the above beliefs would have a _complete_ mental shift.
Everyone does the best that they can with the information they are given. Here's to a society that no longer abuses their dogs because of misinformation!:)
Thank you very much, Dr Mech
Thanks for this video. I learned something today.
It's like saying the dad in a family is the "alpha human".
Garret Narjes that’s typically the case.
Benjamin Figgins alpha doesn’t mean ‘fought to the top.” It just means the top. Alpha is the correct term. All he did was educate on the different versions.
@@eclipsewrecker Alpha means fought to the top. That is exactly what it means. Which is why he's saying it's incorrect to use for natural wolf packs. It is not a synonym of "leader" or "top animal". You wouldn't use "dictator" interchangeably with leader.
@@fae3561 dictator is a specific word used only for a specific control. Alpha is used in many places for many things/positions to mean first, top, leader, and/or best.
It still fits. He identified the alpha by position, then needed to broaden the definition to fit wolves in general. That’s how these scientific studies work. Identify, define, adjust when more/new information is observed
@@eclipsewrecker I should apologize. I often advocate heavily researching but failed to do so myself because of my bias. "Alpha" is the correct term and wolves still have social hierarchies. I feel like I was focusing too much on how "alpha" focused training is often damaging to animals and not based off up to date science. A lot of the people who refer to being "the alpha" do not understand how it actually works, and why it isn't appropriate for us to act the same way as wolves, and that you don't need to use intimidation to be a leader.
Even if the theory from the 70's had been accurate to all wolves, it's still a bit a sad to try to map it onto human sociology. To say that the most worthy and successful men (women need not apply) are the way they are by being the best at violence and domination is not a hopeful notion for community at any scale.
Well that should only apply to ancient humans. But I think when someone uses alpha to explain in modern times they probably mean leader. So now they generalize alpha with being the top or leader
Guess humans just need that ego boost, as if it's not already inflated.
Hello dr. Mech
Any thoughts on omegaverse fiction? Would be great to have your insight on the genre.
BIG respect for this guy!
please everyone, read the book don't shot the dog by Pryor
I have to say, though, as much as I loved that one, I liked Reaching the Animal Mind even more.
Don't Shoot The Dog , by Karen Pryor
Despite this its still true that offspring in a family/pack of wolves will form a pecking order through fighting/play etc. Furthermore wolves not of the offspring of the breeding pair that enter the pack as outsiders have to establish their place in the pack. Pecking order establishment involves mostly what is broadly known as dominance/submission behaviours.
Mech here is merely stating that the 'highest' members of a wild wolf pack are almost always breeding partners, or parents.
What? So everything I was told about wolves, especially watching the documentary: Living With Wolves, was all a lie? What's next, the Easter Bunny doesn't exist? >:U
I kidd.
Well, I learn something new today. c:
This will take a while for people/media/everything to accept this. >.
Living With Wolves is interesting because the wolf pack didn’t form naturally (Jim and Jamie Dutcher are amazing and I love their work, but they obviously didn’t give birth to those wolf puppies). Among unrelated wolves in close proximity (e.g. a lot of the circumstances in zoos and wolf centers, and also in Yellowstone at times because unrelated wolves will join packs, which is exceedingly unusual in other places). So their observations weren’t wrong, it’s just that they weren’t observations of wild wolves functioning as they normally do as was the initial hope of the project.
Well by technically wouldn't that mean they are the alpha wolf. No one seems to challenge them, they lead the pack under strong guidance, and they survived long enough to be able to reproduce. They teach their offspring to survive on instinct.
With DNA we now know the leaders of a wolf pack are the parents..and their children and older children .
@adzug They don't move into a new pack though. Packs very rarely accept outsiders..they are closed. It is only in rare circumstances they may...and this is usually when one of the breeding pair has died and the one left needs a new mate.
When they leave, they look for another lone wolf of the opposite sex and start their own pack...so they all eventually become breeders/parents. Did you not listen to Mech in this video? He states this.
just about every dog trainer (professional and hobbyist) i know really hates that dude. he traumatizes dogs into submission instead of using more humane training methods that cater to dog psychology beyond terrifying animals into submission
who are you talking about Ceaser Millan or however you spell his name?
With DNA we now know the truth at last and that the leaders of a wolf pack are actually the parents..with their children and their older children .
Based on a misconception of wolf behaviour, dog owners have often been directed to establish themselves as the Alpha or pack leader and was first introduced by David Mech (animal ecologist and wolf expert) who later, being a true scientist, as he learned more of the wolves true nature, greatly regretted the term.
Wolves, in actual fact, do not hold any ambition to become the pack leader.
We heard you first thirty fucking times you blasted essentially the same comment in every goddamn reply. And you're just repeating what the video said. Fuck off.
But if theres a stranger wolf wants to enter in the family pack?? They fighting each other for who will be the new pack leader i think..
@@Nic-xr8sd but that is totally different and has nothing to do with a related pack family.
We now know that 99 % of all wolf packs are family members and all DNA related.
@@angeleasfeathers Ok.. what Mech said in this video could also explain why spayed/neutered dogs are less aggressive usually..
@@Nic-xr8sd and of course why a bull or stallion visibly looks and is so different than a steer or gelding.
But again I posted about DNA showing parents as pack leaders and this has nothing to do with the original debunked flawed untrue alpha wolf study 😉
I know the definition of Alpha (and Beta). I also know that when humans hypothesized the pack theory, they hypothesized that Alphas (and Betas) earned their title (through fighting) and that there were multiple family units to a pack. However, we now know that that is not how wild wolves work. The "packs" in the wild are singular family units, and there is no fighting to establish the roles. Thus, "Alpha/Beta" titles are not applicable to wild wolves. Get it?
@Hawaiianstile How many wild wolf packs have you been out and personally studied then....and you're questioning a guy who's spent much of his life doing exactly that?
In ethology, an Alpha is the one who has priority access to limited resources. Where did we get off on such a weird track where we need to change the ethological, scientific words we use to describe behavioral traits or tendencies? If you ask me, this has way more to do with deference to peoples' emotional states than it has anything to do with scientific accuracy. Anyone who studies animal behavior should know that this term doesn't imply conflict in relation to obtaining/maintaining status.
Scratching my head that's what I said
Thank you for sharing this video.
Is it possible to share the information in this video on my seminar or on my youtube?
Excellent point and this is so true about how wolf packs are typically formed.
@adzug If wolves do come into conflict on occasion, it's not common...and it's not really got anything to do with 'Alpha'. Fact is, wolves don't fight their way up some hierarchy in a pack...this is what this video is about...not what conflict wolves from different packs might get into on the rare occasion which will still have no bearing on the social structure in each anyway.
I don't understand the comments, the guy said that this can apply to groups but that typically they are simply families with the oldest male being the leader.
The term isn't scientifically accurate, but the concept is basically the same
It really isn't. The term alpha was supposed to refer to a wolf that becomes a leader through dominance and aggression. Basically fighting their way to the top and beating other's into submission.
What he's saying is that Instead of a leader being an alpha it's just the oldest wolf. So Instead of an alpha commanding his pack it's just the older wolf guiding them for food and safety. Obviously they're both leaders but the kind of leadership is different.
Dr. Mech is really humble.
I wish he would explain why he says wolves are not in a dominance hierarchy in this video -- in another video he says that the parents usually are dominant (Channel: Pack Leader Dogs). If the only difference is that a fight doesn't occur, that sounds like "alpha" would still be the correct term in both cases.
@adzug The photo was taken in the Peak District UK. The UK has a number of similar places such as the Welsh Mountains, Lake District and the Scottish Highlands.
Man, I always used to use the alpha system to talk about the relationship with my family and my dog. Now I feel kind of bad :(
So, if wolves formed a more complex society, one alpha male and female could emerge? Would it then resemble a monarchy like in human society?
a FAMILY. Did you NOT watch this at all?
My whole life has been a lie! Thanks for enlightening me senpai.
Haha. I found out about wolves and stuff through WolfQuest, which is an educational game and I quickly learned there is no "alpha".
watch the whole video
@hyenapeptic But he didn't fight for breeding rights. He simply left his parents and siblings and found a mate of his own and bred with her. No fighting for breeding rights involved.
Ya, i guess theories never change and there are never any new findings. No one can come up with a new way of seeing things through other more indepth study. Its such a waste of time to study anything based on the fact that once one person says something or does something they must know everything about that certain subject. Thank you for pointing this out i will now stop doing everything and forget all the university training i have and live off unemployment insurance.
cool i had no idea... i knew wolves did not usually fight for dominance but i never knew alpha implied fighting for dominance.
@Canislupess thats what i meant though , when they mature they move on to start their own pack. inbreeding will weaken the genetic makeup and when they do they might look for a lone wolf and want to avoid confrontation that can lead to injury or death but the point is abundance or lack of. populations of animals and food are dynamic. theres a natural economy going on and thru lack of access confrontation becomes inevitable. for exp there were a rash of bear attacks on an island
@mydogkanskidrums Meant to say that dogs are NOT really pack animals
Just need to clear up a little confusion here if any one can answer the question. Alright.. So the Breeding male and Female get their positions through default.. according to Mech over here right? So when they mate approximately.. they have a large litter.. What determines the next Breeding pair. If there isn't a dominance conflict.? In addition to that. There have been studies of members of a Pack respecting and pinning ears, lowering tail and giving respect. and what about fighting themselves?
And in Yellowstone, don't forget that.
I personal can understand now why it's an inaccurate term however if someone like me is used to the name Alpha and is comfortable with it then I see no reason one can't use it.
Reason one; It is the WRONG word. Are you a fucking idiot? Using words OUT of context makes you look like one.
@@volgawolfhounds741 it’s not the wrong word.
@adzug Why would he be competing with other males? Didn't Mech state that a pack consists of parents and offspring? Why would a son try to knock his dad off top spot to mate with mum? Such inbreeding wouldn't do the species Offspring leave the pack by the age of 3 to find a mate of their own.
Something I'm surprised more people haven't caught on to here is that while he is saying the dominance hierarchy does not exist in a normal wolf pack family he is saying that it still exists in an unnatural pack that is not family and has been thrown together randomly....the way we do with our dogs at home...think about it. I find it funny how positive only trainers use this video as a way to say the dominance hierarchy has been "debunked" when all it's really doing is confirming its existence. Maybe something people should realize is that the purely positive movement has dominated the current world of training, punishing those who do not use their approved methods.... Remember this, the smartest thing the devil ever did was convince everyone that he didn't exist.
Don't mess up things.
Hierarchy structure comes up when there is a notable lack of resources. Captive wolves are lacking on space, thus they adopt the dominance system because they can't settle families. So... family is their natural way of life, dominance is the emergency one.
Which resource is the one our dogs in our homes are missing?
Don't trust people who tell you about the "leader of the pack". Look for professionals, who have studied scientist sources. Rather than the Cesar Millan language they will be speaking of things like conductism, cognitive-emotional, positive and negative rewards and punishments, target, step learning, stress management, neotecnia, timing, behavior capture...
When I go to the doctor I like the fact that he is product of the science. Modern science.
The modern training methods for dogs are conductism and the cognitive-emotional.
+Abigail Sandifer Dogs are not wolves. Dogs are not "pack animals". They are social, but are not pack animals.
There is no such thing as "purely positive" trainer. But there are trainers who don't use pain, intimidation and fear .
+44prot Just what I was going to say but then I see you have said it :-)
Dr Mech does not say dominance doesn't exist but rather the old idea that a wolf becomes an alpha through physical force and violence in beating other "alphas" doesn't exist in most natural cases of wolf packs.
We need a DOCUMENTARY on this.
Then whats the point of Alpha term in a familiar captive pack? When you have the breeding pair, and their offspring keep displaying dominance and submission to each other. Do you rank them in an hierachy? Are they "fighting" for their place in it?
@Canislupess And the people who base dog behavior on a faulty wolf study just defy logic.
....also parents / breeding pairs will also show their dominance to their offspring - but rarely through fighting or similar activities. They mostly just display 'dominant' body language.
@xiaoquan I see where you are going, but you are assuming that dogs and wolves are the same. They are not. Subsequent studies on domestic feral and pet dogs show that their behavioural traits and social behaviour in particular are markedly different to wolves. They don't form strict hierarchies. Dogs are really pack animals, in the technical sense of the term. Trying to compare dogs to wolves is like comparing chimpanzees to bonobos, or humans to chimpanzees.
Yes, I'd rather listen to you than Dr Mech who has studied wolves his whole life! :)
Just so you know people this does not discredit dominance theory.
@hyenapeptic Parents discourage their offspring from mating with each other thats why....all efforts have to go into one litter. by the time young wolves are 2-3 years old, most left their parent pack to find a mate of their own. Would it really work for the genetic health of the species if a son was to knock his dad off top spot and mate with mum or a sister? Not really...and since packs consist of mum, dad and offspring, it wouldn't work very well that way.
@Ignozi what you think humans are so much higher up then wolves? why not apply this term to humans? everything a wolf has we hav so why not the same terms?
I think it shows growth and the truth.
@adzug Thanks for the channel post btw:)
❤ Thank You Dr!
sound not working for anyone else?
Dr. Mech, if you have two distinct packs join each other, or the "dominant breeder who can fight well" take over an existing pack then what would you describe the behavior/type of winning breeder?
@BluOceanBubbles which brings me back to my first point that i never heard of wolf packs consisting of a pair of parents and their children. i have always understood wolf packs as having numerous unrelated members.
They fight to be the breading male.
David,this term is now being used by
A LOT of young human men........................
I understand that Alpha can be described as the strongest most fit one that took charge of the group by force but i thought Alpha also just meant leader in general. Like what Dr. Mech said about the Breeder Male wolf, considering he is the father wolf, he is probably the oldest and most fit and a wolf that helps take care of the pack and protects it, he would naturally be in charge seeing as there is noone else suitable. Doesn't that make him the natural leader wolf or natural Alpha wolf in a way as well? Or does Alpha have to mean leadership by force?
I think it is important to understand that in science using the proper term helps to remove ambiguity from statements. There are a lot of examples where terms overlap disciplines that use different definitions and confusion can arise. In the video he is explaining how the term alpha has been defined and used in the past because of theories that have since been disproven. Since new animal theories exist it is appropriate to use a different term to describe the "leader" of the pack, because "alpha" carries with it the old definition from old and out of date animal pack behavioral theory.
@@joeracer302 to say that he was the first ever to call the male leader is a bit far fetched, maybe he did maybe he didn't. Or I misunderstood but I don't think he was the one that coined phrase.
With DNA we now know the leaders of a wolf pack are the parents..and their children and older children .
@@angeleasfeathers And what if theres a stranger wolf wants to enter in a family pack??
Why, and in what way, is it wrong to use the greek letter "alpha" to represent a wolf?
Am I "right" or "wrong" calling a helium-4 nucleus an "alpha" particle?
He literally explains why. "Alpha wolf" comes from an old outdated concept that wolves fought for dominance which is not the case in the wild. What we call "Alpha wolves" are simply the the parents of the wolf family. Calling them "alphas" not only provides zero additional information, it is also a misuse of the term and misrepresents the true nature of wolf pack structures.
@@taoliu3949 So if "Alpha wolves" are simply the parents of the wolf family, why can't we call the parents of the wolf family "Alpha wolves"?
When the term "Alpha Particle" was coined there were a lot of things we didn't understand about quarks (and I believe there still are). Do we need to rename the Alpha Particles just because we learned something new?
Do you believe we understand everything about wolves now?
@@matseriksson8177 Do you call human parents "alphas"? What about doe mothers? If not then why are you using the term for wolves? It offers zero context/additional information than simply calling them the "parents" or father/mother.
"Alpha wolves" comes from an outdated belief about wolves that's been thoroughly debunked. By saying "alpha" you imply that the wolf attained its position of dominance through fighting, which is not how wolves function in the wild. The term is used in very specific ways in biology. It's a descriptor, not a proper noun.
Believe him, fifty years spent studying wolves. Got it?
fantambantam yes appeal to authority. You must not practice intellectual honesty.
I really like this guy
@BluOceanBubbles i understand him, i just find it very hard to believe that any creature would relinquish both feeding and breeding rights to a weaker individual.
@BluOceanBubbles i have not read anything saying that a wolf pack, like a bee hive, consist of dominant parent and working off spring.
It sounds hilarious when you put it like that, but...
yeah, actually. Mostly. And when the offspring isn't/aren't they usually leave or get kicked out.