10/25/2024
Totalement d’accord
Dominance theory was a terrible mistake, that even the scientist who cataloged it, regrets doing. The deep level of misunderstanding that happened based on inappropriate studies just spiraled out of control into a culturally accepted excuse to train and work with animals with force and punishment.
Dominance theory was the idea that animals, horses included, have a linear dominance and set roles within the herd. The idea that there is a set leader, a decision maker, who controls the other horses' behaviors through threats and the other horses love this horse as their leader. The idea that horses have a linear set hierarchy that determines who's in charge and only changes if overthrown by someone stronger. These deeply flawed ideas have lead people to believe that they can be the leader horse by mimicking equine behavior, they misunderstood, justifying their use of forceful physical control and punishment to train behavior. All under the idea of being a "good leader".
The thing is, science is constantly growing and self-correcting. As we spend more time actually studying horses in various scenarios and environments, and each species individually, their family units, their herds, packs, groups, etc... We have learned this concept of dominance is wildly inaccurate and deeply unhealthy, only seen in extreme, inappropriate environments (like old overpacked zoos with many unrelated animals, as the original studies were based on).
What's really going on then? What is Dominance really? Do we need to be dominant?
Horse herds really work in a much more fluid and dynamic manner, it's not a linear hierarchy. Horses make decisions based on need, if someone has a need, they satisfy that need, the other horses stay with them out of social bonds and safety in numbers. A secure, confident horse will be more likely to make decisions that lead away from the group, while insecure, nervous horses might be less likely to make decisions, sticking more closely to the center of the herd. This isn't leadership or dominance, just confidence, in themselves and their world. This changes constantly. A confident horse may be more clingy and insecure if they have a pain problem, if they're pregnant, or if they're sick. This dynamic is constantly flowing. Who makes the decision, is up to how much the individual wants something. Who stays or goes in the herd is based on social bonds, friendships, familial relationships, and resource needs.
What was frequently mistaken as "dominance" was actually determined roles of priority access to resources. If a resource is limited, the herd knows who has first access, usually the bully. This varies by resource, my sweet itch mare has priority access to the shelter, while she doesn't care about defending food resources. She may shove everyone out of her way for shelter from bugs, but someone else may shove her out of the way for food. A group of 2 might pair up to move off a single horse who would typically move either of them individually. This access to resources is determined with little squabbles, but usually is limited to just some body language threatening gestures. It would be unhealthy if the herd were to compromise each other in fights over resources, when they have the bigger threat of predators they need to remain safe for. We only see extreme linear resource guarding in domestic settings where resources are limited. If hay is fed in limited supply one horse may always get priority access. If there isn't enough shelter, one horse may not let the others in it. This isn't dominance, but resource guarding. This isn't leadership, but the opposite, a horse who is deeply insecure in their resources, in their safety, violently defending themselves. If one horse resource guards excessively, most of the other horses avoid them, ignore them, don't want to groom with them, and don't want to risk dealing with them. They're like a human child bully, so insecure in themselves they act out against everyone else to try to soothe their need.
Ethology has also shown that horses do not think humans are horses. Even if we mimic their body language, they do not equate us as horses. We don't have a place in their access to resources, because we aren't sharing their resources. We are their PROVIDERS. We are the ones giving them their resources, it's our job to understand herd dynamics and ensure our horses have adequate resources in appropriate ways so there is no need to fighting, insecurity, or herd stress. It's not our job to challenge our horses for access to the very resources we are giving them! We are their caretakers.
Dominance and access to resources has nothing to do with training, only knowing how to provide care and management without creating unhealthy or dangerous equine interactions.
Training should be done with a compassionate understanding of behavioral science and how to apply positive reinforcement. It has nothing to do with herd dynamics or dominance, or even strong leadership, but rather clear communication, compassionate care and gentle behavior training.
Additional resources
https://www.awla.org/uncategorized/alpha-dogs-dominance-theory-fact-or-fiction/
https://www.clickertraining.com/node/2297
https://www.veterinary-practice.com/article/dominance-when-an-outdated-theory-wont-go-away
https://news.asu.edu/20210805-discoveries-myth-alpha-dog
https://journal.iaabcfoundation.org/horse-dominance-1-28/
https://www.thewillingequine.com/post/dominance-leadership
https://www.whole-dog-journal.com/behavior/debunking-the-alpha-dog-theory/
https://positively.com/dog-training/article/ethology-why-pack-theory-is-wrong
https://www.rover.com/blog/alpha-dog-meaning/?msockid=323ef8c5489068da23bbeaa549916988
https://www.veterinary-practice.com/article/dominance-when-an-outdated-theory-wont-go-away
