I have an ever-increasing respect for veterinarians. When I counsel owners of four-legged problem children, I must rely heavily on the information their humans provide, my own snapshot observations of the pet at that moment in time and my professional knowledge of canine and feline behavior. It would make the diagnosis a lot easier if the pet could tell me what hurts, where it hurts and, most importantly, “How does it (whatever the stimulus) make you feel?”
Many people attach human-based emotions to their dog’s behaviors. Contrary to popular beliefs, dogs do not get angry, carry grudges or cry over sad movies. They will, however, demonstrate confusion similar to our own remorse over the loss of a loved one. They will show fierce loyalty that we may misread as love and/or passion. And everyone who has ever owned a dog can tell you all about “those sad eyes.”
Behaviorists generally evaluate pets’ actions based on their drives. Although we can better understand the term if we assume their drives are sort of akin to our emotions, we must realize that drives are more than innate motivational forces which evoke relatively predictable reactions and responses to certain stimuli. For example, a strong prey drive in a sporting or hound breed will cause the dog to chase anyone running away from it. It does not matter whether the “game” is a squirrel, a cat, another dog or a child who is squealing and flailing arms, as children sometimes do.
My favorite example of social drives requires a little background. Dogs are pack animals, which means there are leaders and followers. In the pack, the leaders always eat first, and the followers are obliged by societal rules to eat after the leaders, regardless of whether they are actually hungry.
So, the curtain opens now on “Dad” sitting in his easy chair eating ice cream/cookies/other fattening food after dinner. The ever-faithful best friend is quietly sitting on the floor at its master’s feet, staring woefully up with those killer eyes, even though he just polished off that big bowl of kibble. Dad looks down at dog, back at bowl, down at dog again; then he offers the dregs in the bowl to Poochie. The loyal, dutiful dog licks the bowl clean, as is the duty of the follower. So, Dad has misread the dog doing his social job because he was the magnanimous owner and shared with him.
The social drives also include communication skills, like marking, howling at the moon, sniffing each other and body language. Marking is done in public to let the others know “Fideaux was here.” Territorial marking is done by either urinating or defecating. One owner called me about her dog leaving fecal deposits on her four-year-old child’s bed. The dog was merely making a statement that the child was hers. I instructed mom to keep the bedroom door shut . . . the problem never recurred.
Mounting is usually misread as coming from the sexual drive. The only time the sex drive comes into play is when the female is in heat and at a stage wherein she is receptive to the male’s ministrations. More often, mounting is used to assert (perceived) authority over another. A less assertive method is observed when one dog puts its head on top of another’s shoulders. How the dominated dog reacts determines its level of acceptance and/or submission. If a fight ensues, it may be a demonstration of the protection drive.
The drive to protect covers four areas; the species protection is observed in a mother guarding her babies, area protection covers the space the dog sees as his or hers, personal protection refers to the human handler or owner and self-protection is exemplified in the spat I just described.
Problems often arise when certain drives cause unacceptable behaviors. And, of course, there are other factors that stimulate and/or enhance those behaviors. As we endeavor to determine the pet’s problems and remedial courses of action, we consider the animal’s history, the humans’ perspectives and observations and, most importantly, what the pet tells us through its actions, reactions and responses.
On one recent occasion, we observed the dog’s behavior when we tried to enter the house; we heard the human family’s statements, diagnosed the problem and even offered a solution. The dog suddenly growled at one of the kids who was trying to remove a toy from the dog’s mouth. That stimulated both parents to suddenly recall and tell us of similar incidents involving certain toys and food items. So we then talked with the people about “resource guarding” – an issue that requires an entirely different regimen. Oh, if only the pets could tell us their problems . . . .
