Dominance is a term thrown around a lot in forums, dog shows etc. But what are the characteristics of a dominant dog? Is it simple genetics when a dog is dominant or does it always mean there is a lack of pack structure? Are there varying degrees of dominance? How rare is it to really come across a dominant dog? Can a breeder truly tell which puppy will be dominant at 8 weeks of age or could that change as the puppy gets older? In most cases is it simply lack of pack structure versus a dog being truly dominant? And finally can a handler have strong pack leadership and that dog still will display dominant qualities? As a novice dog owner/trainer I was curious about this and wanted to hear what you experts thought about this subject.

Sometimes I like to explain dominance like a see-saw. One one side, you have dominance. On the other, submission. Any dog can go one way or the other, it's the job of the handler to balance it out. In the middle is the ideal place to be - confident enough to not be terrified of everything, and respectful enough to not be too big of a pain to deal with.
Dominance is a part of every dog, and even a completely cowardly dog can have some level of dominance. A dog has a certain amount of dominance that is genetic, but at the same time, environment and early experiences can alter the dominance level as well. A more or less evenly balanced pup can be tipped one way or the other on the see saw, depending on handling, or lack there of.
Most dogs that I see are overly dominant. The problem is that people don't understand that aggression and dominance are two completely separate things. A golden retriever standing over a child or even worse, standing ON a child is really no different than a rottie doing the same, but the stereotype of the more protection type breeds brings a completely different idea to mind. Both dogs are being dominant, it's just that one is viewed as a threat when the other usually will be viewed as "sweet".
Different dogs show dominance different ways, but in general, if the dog is violating personal space uninvited, it's usually a dominance driven behavior.
Hope that makes sense

IME, which is limited mostly to MWDs, most dogs aren't predestined to be dominant. There are a few dogs that are "hardwired" to be truly dominant by nature. The rest, are born to follow. In a social animal, a pack animal, this is a necessary evolutionary trait. There can be only one alpha.

However, many dogs feel compelled to take on the role of alpha, when they feel a leadership vacuum in their pack.
If a dog is raised from early puppyhood with good solid pack structure and obedience, it is very rare to have a dog that becomes dominant later in life.

They may test the waters a bit when they hit maturity, but if pack rules remain consistant, they quickly resume a non-alpha role.

There is the occassional dog that was just born to be alpha. At any sign of weakness, he/she will jump on the chance to assume the lead. These dogs can be a PITA, because if they do something, it's usually through compulsion, and it is clear they are doing you favor. They usually aren't eager to please.

You see these traits more in certain breeds, like Akitas, because they were bred to be independant and somewhat anti-social, but there are no hard and fast rules.

I've known a couple of dogs like this, but I didn't know them as puppies, so I don't know if it was evident from puppyhood, or if it emerged later.

 Quote: cameron feathers

... Most dogs that I see are overly dominant.

JMO: this isn't my experience. My experience is that dominance is an over-diagnosed trait. This overstatement of dominance (or what I see as overstatement of dominance ) is maybe often the leadership vacuum that Alyssa mentions, and partly the confusion between dominance and aggression (and maybe it's exacerbated sometimes by wanting to see dominance in a dog meant for certain work).

 Quote: alyssa myracle

.... most dogs aren't predestined to be dominant. There are a few dogs that are "hardwired" to be truly dominant by nature. The rest, are born to follow. In a social animal, a pack animal, this is a necessary evolutionary trait. There can be only one alpha. ... However, many dogs feel compelled to take on the role of alpha, when they feel a leadership vacuum in their pack. .... If a dog is raised from early puppyhood with good solid pack structure and obedience, it is very rare to have a dog that becomes dominant later in life. ... They may test the waters a bit when they hit maturity, but if pack rules remain consistant, they quickly resume a non-alpha role. ... There is the occassional dog that was just born to be alpha.

Sounds just about right. JMO.

Good question.

 Quote:

... Most dogs that I see are overly dominant.

I could have sworn I wrote something not too long ago that totally contradicted this statement....

I really can't stand the overuse of the word "dominance." Every little thing and "oh this dog is being dominant." Even worse, is the way people use it as either a bragging right, "no he's not fear aggressive, he's just really really dominant because he's a badass, and, and, he'll totally kill you," or to sound really cool and knowledgeable in the diagnosis of a problem. Dominance has become "the word of the day," every day, for a long time now.

Fact is, "most" dogs are NOT dominant, at all. Certainly not "overly dominant." If you want to see an "overly dominant" dog then come on over, I'll take you on a tour of some "overly dominant" dogs.

A submissive dog is not dominant. This is exactly where the problems come from. If you have a truly dominant dog, he will gladly take rank. Not many people have a truly dominant dog. To me a truly dominant dog is one that continues to challenge GOOD (stress on GOOD!!!) leadership because he is unsatisfied being a lower ranking dog. I stress "good leadership," because this is where the bragging comes in. People who suck at handling a dog and believe that they are good at it, who then turn around and tell everyone "my dog is so super duper dominant he's a real badass," while the dog in the hands of someone more competent would be a complete baby.

The problems occur when the dog is not naturally dominant and is forced to assume a leadership role. "If nobody else is doing it, then I am forced to." Dogs that aren't born to be leaders thrive on being followers, and when put into a leadership position then problems start. This is why it is so easy to take rank over the dogs, because the dogs don't want to be, nor are they truly capable of being, the "pack leader."

The problems people experience with a non-dominant dog that is in a dominant role stems from insecurity of the dog. He is insecure about his role and feels he has to defend his position more so than a dog that is comfortable in this leadership position. This is why, when shown a little leadership, it is so easy to turn the dog into a follower. He is relieved to hand over his badge and gun, and suddenly he turns into a much more pleasant dog to live with because he no longer lives in a constant state of insecurity.

An "overly dominant" dog is the opposite. As I said before, he wants to assume rank and he is uncomfortable in the position of a follower. Any sign of weakness and he will try to pull rank. Constantly watching and waiting for you to prove to him that he can do it better.

Watch your use of terminology Cameron, and your over-generalized statements.

And reading Alyssa's post above just now, I see we are on the same page

Dominance is a word/excuse that many people use to describe why they can't control their dog. Also called a lack of leadership on the part of the owner.

I agree with Mike, Connie, Alyssa and Bob. I have had experience with many MANY dogs over the course of my vet tech, grooming and training career and I have only met a few truly rank and dominant dogs. They are dogs that you don't want to be around,when you meet one you will know it. They give off a vibe that makes me very uncomfortable.

The rest of the population that many people label dominant are summed up by Bob Scott, lack of leadership from the owner. Dogs (and teenagers) are opportunists. Slack off on the leadership and they will see what they can get away with. This doesn't mean they are dominant.

Mike's post is very good and rings true with me, based on my experiences over the past.....however many years.

 Quote: Cindy Easton Rhodes

The rest of the population that many people label dominant are summed up by Bob Scott, lack of leadership from the owner. Dogs (and teenagers) are opportunists. Slack off on the leadership and they will see what they can get away with. This doesn't mean they are dominant.

Yep...
In my very limited experience, (1 dog ) as I became more confident in my handling skills, and learned how to read my puppy, her 'dominance' significantly decreased. It really does boil down to pack leadership (and for me, consistent, calm handling).

Good thread!

Good question, and answers that I betcha will help lots of people to look closer when "dominant" is the word of the day.

It IS a good thread...very interesting.

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, a true dominant dog is somewhat rare? Is this a trait you can identify when they are puppies?

For the experienced dog handlers: Is this a desirable trait, one you would want and would look for in a puppy/dog, for sport or protection work?