Dogs have a certain hierarchy within themselves, and they benefit if their owner ”can speak dog”. It is proven, however, that our dogs do not see us as other dogs, and therefore we don't fit in their pack hierarchy. Hierarchy as a term has also changed it's meaning, and the more we understand dogs, the more we learn that their hierarchy is actually not so stable as it was thought to be in the past, and it's most certainly not based solemnly on aggression.

What exactly is hierarchy, then? How does it work?
​

​ Hierachy within dogs in general is way more complicated that was assumed earlier. Early assumtpions considering hierarchy are based on the behavior of caged wolves, and in closed spaces aggression is prone to increase as the tension grows. Because the resources are limited and tension levels are high, strong dominant animals behave aggressive while less dominant, submissive animals show increased and exaggerated amount of submissive signals, trying to survive in the situation.

When wild wolves were studied, it was revealed that the leading pair of wolves behaved far less aggressive towards their subordinates, and that the leaders changed their hierarchy based on the task at hand. It was also noticed that low rank wolves did, as a matter of fact, stand up for those higher in rank when they had food and their pack members tried to snatch it. This mechanism is essential for any animal that wants to stay alive.

Dogs, according to some new studies, have more stiff hierarchy than wolves, meaning dominant animals tend to be dominant in most situations, while submissive animals are submissive and follow their lead. However, dominance and high rank don't mean aggression and aggressive leaders are seen less trustworthy. Dogs that would be submissive in any other situation might be aggressive and challenge their leader, if their leader has not earned their respect.

In my own pack this is clearly seen with my oldest dog Mr. Arthritis and my second oldest dog Mr. Hyperactivity. Mr. Arthritis is skittish and nervous, and no matter Mr. Hyperactivity is naturally very submissive and kind, boys fought a lot and would still do if kept in the same room. This is because no matter Mr. Arthritis is oldest, dominant and prone to try to lead other dogs, he is not kind. He is aggressive and he can't be trusted. Therefore even the most submissive of dogs stands up against him. He does not deserve his status, so he is challenged. This is something to remember specially when one has dogs that fight. It isn't always the younger one trying to climb up the ladder and dominate more resources. It can also be that the previous leader is seen unstable and therefore the pack tries to dismiss of him/her.

To understand hierarchy is to understand where it is based on. The problem with old leadership theory is that it assumes dogs are born with a mysterious ”will to lead”. This is not true. Dogs are born with the same basic instinct to survive as any animal in the world, including us humans. To understand why some animals act ”like leaders” and try to control others is to understand what benefits this behavior has. Why ”leading” is beneficial for the individual, and why some individuals try to ”lead” more than others?

The benefits of leading are often having more resources and spreading genes in the form of getting to mate. In social species, however, specially in species that usually live with their close relatives, the survival of their pack means survival of their own genes, whether or not they are the ones reproducing. This is why wolves, and dogs, have false pregnancies, for example. Their ability to produce milk and their will to care for puppies that are not their own benefits their family unit. Their own genes.

While getting to mate is considered to be a resource, food is far more important for an individual (tell this to intact male dogs living in same household with bitches in their heat). Dogs also find toys as a resource, though this behavior is far less prominent in old breeds that are still closer to their wild cousins.

What is the connection with leadership and resources, then? Well, leaders get more things. Being dominant, meaning being more active in claiming resources and less active in giving a damn about what others say about it, is being greedy. Dominant dogs want more than their submissive counterparts. It is not clear what exactly causes the individual to be dominant and what makes it submissive, but the difference is there. The varying amount of dominance is what causes the hierarchy. Leader dogs are always more dominant dogs. They want more, and they demand others to respect that. To understand this is the key when trying to understand how leadership works; leaders have resources. Dogs don't want to dominate just because of utter will to become supreme world leaders. They are simply greedy with resources. Submissive dogs are not as greedy. They submit, being comfortable with less. They lack the will to get more than what they need, and considering they have all they need, they simply choose to give up to their more dominant companions. This lessens the tension in the pack.

There is no will to dominate persons or individuals. Leading dogs don't go around kicking their subordinates just because they are leaders. They claim resources. A pack consists of different levels of dominance. No matter dogs as social creatures also have emotional lives and they form friendships and likes and dislikes, the basics of pack hierarchy is based on different levels of dominance over resources.

This is only to make it simple to understand. I am not talking about emotions here nor the relationships dogs form with each other or with their people. As social animals they are able to feel affection, they form friendships and they can even risk their own life, and their resources, to save what is dear to them. We only talked about hierarchy, now, and how and why it is formed.

Where do we people stand, then? If hierarchy is based on dominance over resources, what does it mean to ”be a leader to your dog”?  

​ Dog as a species has developed ways to communicatre specifically with people, and they are born with natural talent of reading our gestures. This was proven in a test with wolf puppy and pet dog puppy. While puppies of wolves, no matter if they were raised with people from the very beginning, were eager to solve problems themselves and search food based on the scent, dog puppies were prone to follow where the human pointed, and they relied on their sense of smell after that in case the direction pointed to them was wrong. Dogs are also reported by scientists to react to expressions of people, and they were able to connect smile with positive things no matter showing teeth is often a sign of distress and/or aggression within dogs.

All described above is based on the fact dogs have been living with us for quite some time. It is beneficial to them. Dogs have evolved to work with us because this means they benefit from it as a species and as individuals. We are not ”part of their pack” as dogs. We are part of their pack as people. Dogs understand we are not dogs, and they don't treat us like they treat other dogs. This also busts the myth of you as a human being having to act like a dominant dog, growling over your piece of meat. There is no real need to ”bump up your dominant status” by performing acts that boost your ego. Walking from the door first, eating first, forbidding dogs from coming to your bed. Dogs don't see this as ”leadership”. You can of course teach your dog all that if it makes your life easier, but in no way does that make you more leader. You are not part of their pack as a dog, so you are not in their pack hierarchy as one either.

In a way, this makes things hard. If you are not seen as a dog, how can you ever be an authority to your dogs? Well, in a way you can't. Since you are not a dog and therefore you are not part of their hierarchy, you are never seen as ”the alpha dog”. You can, however, cheat a little bit. You can claim your place as the most respected one by controlling what those greedy, opportunistic dogs want the most; precious resources.

By controlling the resources you control a dog, whether or not it is dominant or submissive. When a dog learns doing a favor to you means getting some resource it wants, it will eventually start to live up to your will. The same happens with submissive dogs; they get extra resources by doing what you say. Your leadership over your dogs is based on benefit. Make yourself beneficial for your dogs.

Obviously, dogs as social creatures also understand the basics of respect. Demand respect. Your resources are yours, and you give them when you feel like it. Dog can't just come and take it. There are also some things your dog can't do, and you must be persistent when you teach it to avoid this behavior. Our relationship with our dogs is more than just ”I scratch your back if you scratch mine”, but it is important to understand why dogs try their luck as teens or why they are disobedient sometimes. They are not trying to climb over you and be leacers because they just want to. They simply want more resources, and when you control those resources and make yourself beneficial for your dogs, they are far more likely to willingly follow your instructions.

There is no leadership problem, because you are not a dog and your dogs don't see you as one. If your dogs don't respect you, in most cases you are not beneficial to them, meaning doing what you say gives nothing to them, they are afraid of you (they may do what you say but they do it without joy, just to avoid punishment) or they simply don't know what you ask of them. Make sure your dog knows what you expect from it, make sure it is praised when it does the right thing, and make sure it knows you are the main source of all good and fun, and it will do what you want it to do.

Let's start with what science says; they are part of carnivora order. They are mainly meat eaters, and their physical features support this. However, when we take a look at the dogs dietary system, it actually differs from creatures like cats and ferrets, for example, that can ONLY use meat sources for food. Dogs CAN use plant sources, and newest research show some individuals are better in that than the others. This means, living with people as scavengers has lead to the dog developing more towards omivore that can use various food sources. Evolution just isn't quite there yet.

In this post I am not going to talk about dogs being carnivore (anatomy) or omnivore (their ability to use plant sources) more than what has been stated. There are way better and more educated people out there to talk about that. However, it is important to understand that dogs are able to use plant sources, no matter what many BARF and prey model and raw feeders might tell you. There are multiple sources out there proving dogs can use carbohydrates and they can use plants, and that they can even use vitamins and minerals found in plants.

The most common explanation people have against using plants is that dogs don't have amylase in their saliva like herbivores do. They don't, that ius correct, but research has shown dogs do produce amylase in their body and they even have genes to support the digestion of plant based material (https://primalpooch.com/the-great-debate-do-dogs-need-fruits-and-vegetables/ has a great post about this matter with many different sources. Check it out!). This means, to some extent some individuals can use plants and will benefit from them

This leads us to the question I want to talk about today; why do I feel feeding vegetables along with meat supports your dog's health, and why I feel like adding vegetables to your dog's meat based diet is a good thing.
​

Following is based strongly on the pet nutrition blogger Rodney Habib's research. He has studied pet nutrition and after discussing with numerous experts has came into conclusion that plants can be used to fill in the gaps in modern raw feeding diets.

These gaps are created mostly because raw feeders, such as me, rarely provide the dog with 95% of their prey animals, and we usually provide human bred meat from just a few sources. This means, dogs are not eating like wolves would in the wild. One also needs to remember dogs are not wolves, and that dogs have better adapted to use plant sources and for example carbohydrates. Therefore, we CAN use plant sources to fill in the gaps left with too simple meat based diet, specially when the meat is not from organic sources and thus richer in, well, everyhting than your basic factory meat.

Many raw feeders feed minerals and vitamins from jars. Some self proclaimed feeding experts state raw feeding and feeding organs and meat is never enough to provide the dog enough nutrients such as vitamins and for example zinc, so they turn to man-made supplements to provide their dog with that. They base their opinions on the same research material as I do, but we look the matter from different perspective. They think what I can't get from commercial meats I get from jars. I think what I can't get from commercial meats I must try to get naturally, because animals in the wild do not die from defficiency. They thrive, in best cases. There MUST be a way for me to mimic that. True, wild animals do lack some vitamins and minerals depending on what situation they have with their prey animals, how often they eat and where they live, but if they can get everything they need from their diet, then it is simply false to say one can't give the dog what it needs only by feeding it natural ingredients.

Research proves that while it is not possible to give the dog all it needs from veggies and plants, you can fill in the small gaps left with plants when you provide your dog with good, preferably organic meats. You might have to give your dog some supplements, like the added zinc, if you do not feed your dog whole prey animals from various sources, but you can get most out of meat and you can benefit from veggies if you just pay some attention. 
​

​
​The most common thing I hear against using plants in diet is that there is hardly anything else than water in plants.

My little sister went vegan a few years back. Like, not just partially but full damn organic vegan. She uses no supplements, either. She tries to get everything she needs from natural sources. Almost two years ago she also had a child, and she decided with her partner that the child would go full organic vegan too. I, as a meat eater, was very sure the child would have horrible problems in future because we people are meant to be omnivore by nature.

Turned out I was wrong. The child thrives, and should it be right what many raw feeders say, that there is simply not enough vitamins and minerals in plants, it should not thrive. It should be dead. It is wrong, just simply and plainly wrong, to say you can't get vitamins from plants. You CAN. You must, however, remember that dogs are not as good in using those vitamins as we are and that you can't provide dogs mainly plant based food and expect them to be healthy. Dogs do best when their diet is based on meat. Plants are there only to fill in certain gaps left when we feed our animals with two or three main protein sources and organs, leaving out other parts of the prey animals.

Steve Brown, dog nutrition experts too, is know to have said

“Vegetables provide essential nutrients, including fiber, minerals, and vitamins. Without plant matter providing those nutrients, an all-meat diet would need supplements. ”

I have not studied more about Mr. Brown's ideology, but it seems to go together with what others have said.

Also, In 2005, Purdue University conducted a study using fresh vegetables in canine diets. Their plan was to see if vegetables affected incidences of bladder cancer in dogs. The results show that vegetable consumption has been reported to reduce the risk of TCC in Scottish terriers who have a strong breed-associated risk for the disease (Raghavan et al. 2005). The numbers were as high as reducing the risk by 90% if the vegetables used were green leafy vegetables high in fiber and low in carbs.

Where is this based on?
​

​To make this simple enough for my own brains; studies have shown that vegetables can be used to boost the process called autophagy, which means the process the body goes through to clean itself of debris, toxins and damaged cells and mitochondria. This leads to better over all health and longer lifespan of cells (meaning, longer life in general).

Cancer happens when the cancerous cells appear and start to grow. Protein and carbohydrates, specially getting more protein that is needed, has been reported to increase the growth of cells, even the growth of cancer. Behind this is the process called mTOR. The process has also been reported to inhibit autophagy, meaning the unnecessary growth of cells is messing up the system which takes care of cleaning up our system and making sure we have better cellular lifespan.

Implimenting fiber-rich and low carb vegetables in the diet can both boost the autophagy and benefit the microbiome inside the digestive system (this means, the better the microbiome, the healthier the dog), AND help slow down the unnecessary growth, meaning the mTOR, that would happen if the dog would get enormous amounts of protein. Since meat protein is where the dogs get their vitamins and minerals in raw feeding, producing some of the vitamins and minerals in the form of plants will slow down the process of growth without slowing down autophagy. The cleaning process continues, microbiome is kept healthy, but the unnecessary growth or unnecessary cells that would otherwise mess with the autophagy and cause tumors to spread is slowed down.

Now, this is highly speculative, BUT the study with Scottish terriers did show adding veggies to replace small portion of their diet of kibble (note here, high in carbs. Sugars stimulate mTOR too, like we remember) did lower their risks of getting cancer.

We are onto something here. We can't leave meat out of the diet because dogs need meat, but we can use vegetables to provide nutrients and fill the gaps and boost the microbiome, and it may also benefit us in the form of not having to feed humongous amounts of protein.

Nobody uses this now as any kind of justification on making their dog vegan. That is in any way against any biological facts. I am not saying feed your dog only with veggies. I am saying adding veggies in a little amount might be a good idea because of all the above.  
​

​Well, I assume nothing else than knowing all the above. Knowing stuff in usually beneficial.

TO ME all the above means adding some small portion of leafy greens in my dog's diet, those rich with fiber and low in carb, is probably a good idea. I get vitamins, minerals and support digestive system and I can still offer my dog energy in the form it needs, protein and fat. I can also avoid chemicals and artificial supplements to certain extent. To me this adds to the purity of the food. The less we consume anything artificial, the better our system works. It's the same with dogs and people alike. 

One needs to remember, always, that for a dog most of the vitamins and minerals come from organs such as liver, but individuals are more or less likely to get something out of vegetables too. Fiber and over all good effects of vegetables are something that affect every dog. 

So your mom was right. Eat your veggies. Give your dog some, too, if you wish.

I own dogs that are in very different life stages and need very different things. Mr. Arthritis is an old man, tends to get chubby easily and has a stress belly. Mr. Hyperactivity is an old man with arthritis as well, but he is also still active and energetic. He needs special diet to support his joints. Mrs. Aloofness is a middle age lady with very sophisticated taste, she gets fat easily and she enjoys long naps. Exercising isn't really ”her thing”. Ms. Dominance is young, full of energy, and she exercises a lot. She jumps, climbs, pulls and the terrain she plays on changes from grass to little pebbles to forest full of branches and rocks. I also have an elderly ferret, who could use some more weigh and has bad teeth, and an adult ferret, who loves to play but also loves to sleep. A lot.

There is no way I could ever feed all my pets the same exact food. All my dogs the same kibble, both my ferrets the same kibble. Yes, I have some kibble there and they do eat kibble every now and then, but their main diet has to be specifically meant for them. It has to answer to their needs. Not a single brand of commercial pet food can offer me EVERYTHING I need in the same bag, and it can't do that to anyone else either.  
​

 The amount of brands is endless. There are bags after bags after bags on shelves, each promising to answer to your every need. There are foods for active dogs, foods for puppies, foods for elders, foods for dogs with gastric issues. One could think it's easy to find a good fit, when in reality finding a good fit is pretty impossible unless your dog was the exact dog they developed the food for.

First problem of commercial dog foods is that they are developed and engineered to answer to the so called ”example dog's” needs. The problem is, none of our pets happens to be that example dog. They live different lives with different exercise, different environment and different genetics.

”For many years, the public, through TV and magazine ads, colorfur packaging, endorsements from actors and even our own veterinarians was told that dry and canned dog food was high quality and the best food for our dogs. We were told that all of the essential protein, carbohydrates, fat, vitamins and minerals were all right there in the package and all we had to do was pour it into a bowl. It was easy and convenient way to feed our pets and everyone agreed, it was easy to do and our pets readily ate it. Sales of dry and canned foods soared, particularly after World War II with baby boomers staring families and the family pet being a big part of it.” - Victoria Spencer (Afghan Hound – A contemporary view, 2014)

Foods are sold to us with easyness. How easy would it be to answer to every active dog's needs by buying food meant for active dogs? Or have a healthy senior dog by buying senior foods? This image is sold to us with ads, and it is temping to think the promises are true. However, the general idea of every dogs being the exact same is like stating all people should eat the same food. It's completely ridiculous idea since we need different things, everyone knows that. Food producers know this too, but they continue to market their foods as ”fit for all”, because the easy way is a tempting way.

The next big issue with commercial foods is that most of them are manufactured in countries that demand little to no quality control considering the ingredients.

Lately there have been many cases of commercial pet foods causing problems. News pop up frequently stating dog foods have caused poisonings or other health related issues. This is due to the fact the quality of ingredients isn't supervised. According to many sources, for example the documentary Pet Fooled and numerous different sources in the net, including www.truthaboutpetfood.com , state that meats and grain used in dog foods are low quality, often leftovers or even plain garbage, and they are handled with unhygienic manners. Now, the situation may and does vary from country to country, but since most of our pet foods come from USA, we can assume most of them are exactly what is described above.

Why use low quality ingredients? It's cheaper, first of all. Secondly, dogs as scavengers can process foods impressively well and they can live long, even healthy lives no matter the food they consume is not the greatest. This does not mean all dogs will. It has even been speculated that the increasing lecels of canine cancers would have something to do with processed commercial dog foods made from bad ingredients filled with many kinds of unnecessary chemicals bad for health.

Cost is also the reason why dog foods are mostly grain. The amount of carbohydrates in dog foods is astonishing. Meat is expensive, processing meat is expensive, and even if you use low quality meat you pay more the more meat your products contains. Therefore grain is used. Rice, corn, even wheat. None of these are in any way natural food for dogs. Dog can benefit from carbohydrates, but this can not justify majority of the food consisting of grains.

There are good brands available. Usually these brands can tell you exactly where their ingredients come from and they use good ingredients free from chemicals. Their sources are trustworthy, preferably local, and no third party is included. 
​

Another issue with many commercial foods is poor proof of used ingredients. Some brands have very little to no actual information on where all the stuff mentioned in the bag comes from. They say they have lots of meat and this and that and their food contains this much of whatevers, but there is no actual information even about what kind of meat is used, from where they get for example all the mentioned vitamins and minerals, and how much does the product contain grain, and what grain. Sometimes names like ”chicken meal” or ”protein meal” are used. This means the food manufacturers have bought already rendered product that in some cases could even consist of the remains of sick animals, road kills, even deceased pets (www.truthaboutpetfood.com).

If you browse through the list of ingerients you can even find added color. This being paint. Noms.

If the manufacturers themselves can't be sure of the origins and quality of their ingredients, there is no way a customer could ever know for sure. The only way to know what goes into your dog's mouth is to prepare the food from real ingredients yourself. 

The quality of the ingredients matter. Buying the cheapest possible leftovers from butchers is sadly very common, but no dog will live a healthy life eating pork legs or chicken necks only. Whether you use raw or cook for your dogs, it's also important to know what your dog needs. No matter dogs can live with many diets, surviving doesn't mean the diet is optimal. You may want to do some research and be critical.

Unfortunately it seems there really is no fast lane to victory. Ignorance is bliss, but knowing your basics when feeding a dog properly is just a must. This doesn't have to mean spending your evenings crying and calculating milligrams. You can always rely on those good, reliable sources of food, ask some help or read some tips. There are many found in books and internet. 

​I have talked about feeding raw meat before, so if you want to, you might like to check out my previous post.

Before we start, I want to underline once more I am just a dog enthusiast and someone who fights to feed my dogs the very best I can. None of what I write here is to be considered an ultimate truth. I base my feeding mainly to the teachings of two dog feeding instructors. In some things they agree, in some they disagree. I am not really swearing for either's name, I just try to pick up what I can and make my own assumptions.

Basically when raw feeding a dog you must make sure you are giving your dog every vitamin and mineral it needs as well as the right kind of meat it can consume and use. Now, some people believe all this can be achieved with natural ingredients, while some people believe you can never get enough from the food itself. I am somewhere in the middle. I think it is possible to get everything you need from natural sources, but that situation might be easier to accomplish with some well chosen ad-ons.

I am NOT one of those who think it's best to give lots of extra. I believe filling the need is a must, some extra to that doesn't do harm, but giving double doses based on limited internet sources or personal thoughts is most likely not justified.

At this point I am using the chart offered by Katiska (https://www.katiska.info/ruokinta/yleista/vitamiinit-ja-hivenaineet-pahkinankuoressa/) explaining the needs of vitamins and minerals. The chart itself is based on various sources AND personal opinions, and therefore I am also using what I have learned from another dog food instructor, Riikka Lahti from the MUSH team ( https://www.mushbarf.com/fi/ ).

Some vitamins and minerals are more important than others when trying to build a balanced diet. This is both because there are both fat- and water-soluble vitamins as well as the fact that some vitamins are easy to get from the food while others are tougher.

Some vitamins the dog most likely gets enough from it's diet when raw feeding are vitamins B and C. There are both produced by the dog itself, and there's lots of vitamin Bs in meat. C-vitamin is also found in fruit, some veggies and liver.

Vitamins you might want to look a bit closer are vitamins A, E and K.

A vitamin is found mainly in liver. It is fat-soluble and that can't be ignored, no matter dog is somewhat able to push out the vitamin it doesn't need. Judging by the chart the minimal amount of A-vitamin per day would be 22,5mcg per kilogram. The amount of A-vitamin one gets from liver depends on what liver is used. I use pork/beef liver, so the amount is somewhere around 19 000 mcg / 100g. This means 1g of liver would have around 190 mcg of vitamin A. Mss. Dominance is around 24 kilograms, so she'd need 540 mcg vitamin A per day, meaning about 2,8 grams of liver per day. 2,8 grams. However, the absorbing is not optimal, so giving a little teaspoon of liver per day would fill her need of vitamin A just fine and not give a dangerous overdose either (teaspoon being about 5g). If you are giving something else with vitamin A in it, you might want to make sure the dose doesn't get too high, though. We talk about this later.

E-vitamin is found in fats and oils. The best way to get enough E-vitamin is to feed good quality, preferably cold pressed, oils and fish-liver oil. Some people like to add drops of E vitamin as well. I don't do that, and I will explain later why so. The chart suggests that the need of the vitamin E is 0,5 mg per kilograms. This means, once more, that for example Mss. Dominance would need around 15mg of vitamin E per day. From fish liver oil you get about 10 mg per 5 ml. Obviously from that very same oil you also get lots of vitamin A, around 250 mcg per 5 ml, so be careful with liver if you feed fish liver oil. I prefer to use sunflower oil and rapeseed oil mixed, and this way I get near the optimal.

I am a little bit over careful with possible over dosing, and therefore my boys, who eat also kibble and get A-vitamin from there, too, don't get liver that often. My girls need to have liver so they have all the vitamins they need, so in their case I try to give liver not daily but once in a few days or so. They still have the fish liver oil to give them A. And just to compare, and to ease my own mind, Royal Canin Maxi adult gives about 480 mcg / 100 g , so by eating that my girls would get more vitamin A than they do now (assuming they get about 3-4 grams of liver per daily, which they don't every day, and 250 mcg from fish liver oil).

There is not much I know to say about vitamin K. It is found in some light meats, liver, and produced in small amounts by the dog itself. Some greens, including spinach, include vitamin K as well. There is no real need to add vitamin K, as long as the dog is fed properly and it is healthy. Vets do give vitamin K in case of poisoning however, but in normal situation there should be no need to add vitamin K if the feeding is otherwise alright and the dog is healthy.

Now we get to the really important stuff, the vitamin D.

Vitamin D has it's fingers in many different processes within the body. The most important role is working together with calcium and allowing it to absorb. If the dog is suffering from lack of vitamin D, it can't use calcium, no matter how much is given. Therefore adding vitamin D when raw feeding is to be considered essential.

The optimal amount of vitamin D per day is said by the chart to be 0.7 mcg per kg. Most sources in the net, however, talk about 0.3 or 0.4 mcg, and since 0.7 mcg is the writers own opinion, I go with 0.3 mch per day per kilogram as the daily need. Once more, we use Mss. Dominance as an example and calculate her need to be around 8 mcg per day. So, where to start gathering that? Well, fish is one good option. 100 grams of sea salmon has about 6.8 mcg of vitamin D. One can also use fish liver oil, since it has pretty high amount of vitamin D (10 mcg per 5ml). Once more, if fish liver oil is used, make sure the amount of vitamin A is not super high.

Some people give products meant for people, but I find this controversial as if we are supposed to feed optimal food, I eant to give as little chemicals as possible. Fish liver oil and fish are natural sources for vitamin D.

 Minerals come in many, and I am mostly concentrating on those you can actually add. Most minerals are gotten from the meat itself, or from the veggies added to the diet. Iodine is gotten from the dried seaweed most raw feeders are using.

Zinc and calcium are probably the most important to look at closer.

Calcium is gotten from bones. Now, remember what was said about the vitamin D, now. No amount of calcium does any good if the dog is lacking vitamin D. When it gets enough vitamin D, the suggested amount of calcium per kg is 60 mg. With our example girl the amount of calcium per day would be about 1,4 g.

If you feed bones, calcium is rarely a problem. If you feed calcium as a powder, make sure the amount of calcium is high enough.

Zinc is one important mineral, and probably the most comtroversial. Some people say zinc is gotten from the food while others say one can never get enough zinc from the food. There is zinc in the meat as well as in internal organs, but it doesn't absorb that well. The minimal amount of zinc needed per kilogram is about 1mg, the said optimal being 2mg. I am not sure in what that optimal is based on, so I have been giving our example dog about 30mgs per day, trusting that the lacking amount is gotten from the meats and veggies she eats.

Zinc has many jobs to do, too, but as someone who owns long haired dogs one of the most obvious is good coat and good nails. Now, zinc if often paired with biotin and metionin, and as I have been using products with and without the last two I have to say I noticed the difference when using zinc paired with the said ingrediends opposing to using it without them. Therefore I use products with biotin and metionin, these days.  
​

 From what I have gathered and read, what I need to add to my dog's diet are vitamins A, D and E as well as calcium and zinc. I also need to add seaweed to get enough iodine.

As a source for vitamin A I use liver, mainly, and fish liver oil. This way the amount of A the dog gets is a tad high (not even a tad), but since vitamin A is pushed out by the dog if it's not needed I am not too worried. I also give more than enough zinc and that helps vitamin A to absorb. I give very little liver per day, and I try to compensate this by making sure we have enough oils and veggies in the food to fill the needs of vitamins K and E that are both also met in liver.

Enough calcium could be achieved with feeding crushed bones, but since I'm hesitant to do that due to Mss. Dominance's special needs, I add calcium to their food as a powder. My powder is not having added vitamin D in it, however, so I use salmon to get the vitamin D I need for the calcium to be absorbed. I might change, later, to a product that has vitamin D added, but by far I haven't founded one with reasonable prize.

Zinc is added from a jar as well. I use Avital Biotin, so the need per day is 2 pills (this means 30 mgs of zinc per day, which is over the minimum but under the said optimal. I trust the gap is filled with zinc from the meats and organs and veggies I use). 

So in the end added to our meats and oils I have no more than 5 jars / bottles of supplements. To someone like me who hates any kind of playing with bottles and jars that is a tad irritating. Sometimes I wish for an easier solution, and there actually IS one. That's called MUSH Vaisto, a complete raw food made by a Finnish company MUSH. Their products are 100% Finnish, with the exception of some meats one just don't have here in Finland. We don't actually have sea salmon swimming in our lakes here.

Anyways, what I like in Vaisto complete foods is that they fill all basic needs of the dog and one doesn't necessarily have to add anything to them. I would probably still add zinc and maybe vitamin D in the form of the fish liver oil just to be sure, but other than that I wouldn't have to add anything. The simplicity of this intrigues me and should it be I'd only have one dog I would totally go for Vaisto. I also suggest it strongly, as my own experiences with it have been great.

My only problem, owning 4 dogs, is the cost. No matter during some months I choose the easy road and go with Vaisto, during some other, less rich months it's cheaper for me to mix the meats myself. During those times I mainly buy my meats from KennelRehu. Sometimes I buy some meats from pet stores, specially for my ferrets since they are very nitpicky, but that tends to be somewhat costy.

Since cost is a factor to most of us, let's talk about expenses next. 
​

 This is something I find myself asking any time someone makes a post like this. ”Yes, fancy numbers and all, but how does that look in real life?!”

Well, it looks like this:

I add 450 to 500 grams of meat mix I have prepared. This mix consists of 1000 grams of grounded turkey, 500 grams of grounded beef/pork, 500 grams of grounded fish and about 100 grams of veggies (usually grounded raw spinach, broccoli, cauliflower and carrots, along with some possible seasonal berries like cowberries, blueberries, apples, zucchini etc.)

To this I add supplements based on the dog's weight. For Mss. Dominance this would be about 2 grams of calcium in total, so I don't really add that much because the salmon I use already has calcium, a little bit of seaweed, 2 pills of Avital Biotin, 5ml of fish liver oil (when we use it), half a teaspoon or so of liver, some rapeseed oil (I hate that name, seriously), some sunflower oil, some grounded flax if needed. Sometimes I add lactic acid bacteria, sometimes I crack an egg there and reduce the amount of meat a bit.

It sounds like a hassle, and it is a bit, so I usually give all supplements during evening. In the morning I only give the meat mix with some added grounded flax and oils, because it's faster. I have more time to play jar bingo in the evening.

* just to mention, I do use Working Dog Hyaluron 365 for my boys every day, but as it's not a must, I left it out of this post. I talked about it more in my post about arthritis. We also have kibble days every now and then, usually when I forgot to defrost food, and boys get some kibble every day because they tend to get hungry during the night if they don't get kibble in the evening, but most of our diet is based on raw meat and the calculations above.   

We have a wide variety of companion breeds these days. Most of those breeds have served some other purpose too in the past, but have been bred to be companions after they were replaced with modern technology or just simply not needed anymore. Times change. Many breeds had their loyal friends back in the days and when the breed's original purpose was no longer useful they were bred to be companions. This meant their working traits or certain strong instincts were bred away in order to make them more easy to live with.

Most of companion breeds are small. In FCI we have a whole group of companion and toy breeds. While some of the breeds are large or medium, companion dogs are often compatible with small modern apartments that don't have large yards or much room. Most of modern people live in cities and work long days, so having a dog that need tons of exercise and room and makes lots of noise just isn't practical. 

Then why do people end up taking in breeds that still have strong instincts and breed specific traits that need special attention? If we have a whole group of companion breeds, why we have hunting breeds and high prey drive breeds ending up with families that find their behavior problematic?
​

Unfortunately looks play a huge part in why certain active working breeds with strong instincts that may cause some problems in modern society end up in wrong families. Some breeds like Siberian huskies resemble the type of an arctic ”base dog” people find them aesthetically pleasing. They also look wolf-like to inexperienced eye which is yet another reason people have strong liking on them. However, huskies are a breed that need lots of exercise and usually at least another dog in the family. They don't do well alone, they tend to be vocal with their pack and they like to work. They pull, and that is what they were bred to do. Taking in a husky, keeping it in a small apartment all day long alone and walking it on a no-pull harness an hour a day is ignoring the dog's needs. Sometimes some dogs, specially from show lines, may end up adapting. Most do not.

The same thing happens regularly with hunting breeds. Some breeds like dachshunds can live happily as family pets as long as they get to use their energy in some breed specific way. They like to sniff around, dig and ”kill a prey”, and if their needs are not met, they are not happy. They start to act up. Sometimes people don't understand many of those show stars work outside the show ring, or they have large open areas they can use their hunting instincts on. Some flashy breeds like Weimaraners are still widely and often used as hunting dogs and they don't do well at all being just home pets. Luckily most breeders are strict with homes, but accidents happen.

Movies have a tendency to increase the demand of a breed. When Disney put out 101 Dalmatians, thousands of young dalmatians ended up searching for new homes during the next few years. People fell in love with the breed from the movie, and when they realized what they saw in the movie had nothing to do with the actual breed they got rid of the dog. Turned out ”Pongo” was far more interested in ripping the house up and launching at other dogs than it was finding the love of a lifetime for his owner.

Pumis and schipperkes are great examples of breeds that look simply adorable but are actually pretty hard-headed and active. They are not for everyone, yet their looks have led many people taking in a pup and later giving it up when it turned out far less adorable than they thought.

To add to all the above, there is a trend to go for the working line of the breed instead of the usually more calm show line. Working lines tend to loos less exaggerated, but that is not the only way they differ from the show line. They are usually far more active and they require more things to do. Someone who just took one in because it looked better than the puffy show star may be up for a surprise if the needs of the working dog are not met.

All of this applies also to breed mixes. It is harder to tell how a mixed breed dog will end up when it's older, but it's parents can tell us a lot. If the breeds in the ancestry are known, we can also assume something about the possible breed related traits the dog may end up having. All this should be taken into consideration when thinking about buying a pup, no matter how adorable or cool the puppies and the parents look like.  
​

Frustration shows in many ways. Earlier I wrote about lack of exercise and mentioned some behavioral issues there that could be caused by it. The same applies here. Aggression, destroying home and refusing to listen or trying to boss people around can all tell about frustration caused by being unable to behave in a breed specific way. The mind fills the gap with some secondary behavior in an attempt to reduce stress caused by frustration.

​Sometimes the dog will end up doing what it was bred to do but with some unwanted target. This is the most common with herding breeds starting to herd cars, bicycles or people, or cattle dogs nibbling at ankles. Guarding dogs can turn very dangerously territorial and alerting dogs often alert about every small sound they hear. This is the case with many small spitz that live in towns. It's in their nature to alert. They do what they were bred to do, no matter the neighbors may disagree.

All above can be controlled with training to a certain point, but in most cases the problem remains for as long as the dog is frustrated. This means the only solution would be to combine training with some breed specific hobby. Luckily, dogs are not that picky with their hobbies. They don't know if the lure they chase is alive, they just enjoy chasing it. Dachshunds may be all happy tracking down pieces of beef in some man made tunnels and herding breeds can try their luck with experienced shepherd and some sheep that are used to being herded by dogs. They can also enjoy some other activity where they can work with their owner and focus.

It's way easier to live with a dog that fits your life style than trying to learn a new way of life to adapt to your dog. This is why one should be extra careful when picking a breed or a breed mix. We will later discuss about some traits of individual dogs and how important it is to pick the right puppy from the litter, but to get to that point we need to understand the importance of picking the breed first.

If you enjoy short walks and relaxing on the cough watching TV or reading a good book, find a companion breed. It doesn't matter if you have always wanted a rottweiler. If you don't live a life fit for a rottweiler, don't take it in. No breed should be chosen just based on how cool it looks. Many people who struggle with their large strong working breed for years could have been completely happy with a small companion breed. This goes vice versa, too; if you are an active outdoors person who loves hikes and wants a dog that can keep up and maybe even accompany you to hunting grounds, maybe don't pick a French bulldog.  

When I meet a person with a problematic dog, I always want to know as much of the dog as I possibly can. I make sure all the normal needs of the dog are met (more than often they are not) and after that I want to know how the breed specific needs are met. Many people seem to think a trainer or a consultant can somehow magically transform the dog and make it perfect for them, but this is a false assumption. They can do nothing if the dog is not given right kind of stimulation and if the owner isn't ready to work with the dog.

There is nothing I or any other trainer or consultant can do if the dog lives in a home that is not fit for it. The owner needs to be ready to change their ways if that is what the dog needs. This means if they have a hunting dog, they need to find a way to answer to it's need to track, for example. If they have a sighthound, it needs to run free. If they have a husky, it needs to work. If they have a Belgian shepherd malinois, it needs stuff to do and things to think. Exercise. There is no cure to a breed specific trait, and there should not be. The human is the one that took the dog in, and if the dog is to stay in the family the human must answer to it's needs. There may be some other problems too that need training and working on, but the general problem of totally wrong kind of environment needs to be attacked first. Only after that those other behavioral issues can be worked with. Sometimes there even isn't any other problem. Boredom and frustration cause many kind of problematic behavior, not to mention sometimes the whole ”problematic behavior” is actually the dog performing a task it's meant to perform. It's owners just simply find it difficult to work with.

The problem with many TV superstar trainers is the idea of ”fixing” the dog's ”problems” when in many cases the actual problem is the human being who fails to meet the needs of his/her dog. Teaching the dog a trick with pieces of cheese or hissing and correcting it when it growls is reacting to behavior that is caused by some bigger issue. Shows have limited TV time and no matter there is lot of work put in every dog, viewers only see a fracture of it. This can lead to thinking hiring a trainer to meet the dog a couple of times is a solution to one's problems. Unfortunately some so called trainers know this and they end up taking people's money and giving them lots of bad advice when in reality the problem behind the behavior is never even figured out. They may even take the dog in to participate in ”a camp”, but when the dog returns so do the problems should it be they are caused by frustration.

There really is no highway to Heaven here. Unfortunately, if the owner isn't willing to work with the dog and answer to it's needs, there is nothing anyone can do. The only way to make sure this so called problem behavior stops is to make sure the dog gets to be what it's instincts tell it to be. Obviously there are dogs that have bad nerves, traumatized dogs and ill dogs that are pain, but those dogs are a completely new story. It's way more common to meet dogs that would have no problems at all if the people owning them would pay some attention to what their dog is and find a way to let it behave like it's supposed to. 

​We can choose to see that breed specific behavior as a problem, or we can try and build something out of it. I prefer the latter.