The better analogy for being a pack leader comes from management literature. While there are different styles of leadership, the most important characteristics of a great leader are clarity and consistency. Without those two qualities, people (and dogs) cannot know your intentions. Great leaders are also respected, not because of their position, but because of their inner strength and integrity. Leaders do what they say. Leaders listen to people, and although they may not always agree, they have respect for others. Great leaders help people.

It wasn’t until I started working with Callie in the Dog Project that I realized just how much she could be dialed in to my signals. Like a catcher and pitcher, we became a team. She had always had that ability. I just hadn’t given her any clear direction before.

Eventually, I came to the conclusion that the key to improving dog-human relationships is through social cognition, not behaviorism. Positive reinforcement is a shortcut to train dogs, but it is not necessarily the best way to form a relationship with them. To truly live with dogs, humans need to become “great leaders.” Not dictators who rule by doling out treats and by threatening punishment, but leaders who respect and value their dogs as sentient beings.

Even though I couldn’t have known about the depth of dogs’ social cognition when we started, respect for dogs had been built into the Dog Project. Early on, we had made the presumptive decision to give the dogs the right of self-determination. If they didn’t want to be in the MRI, they could walk out. Same as a human. We created a consent form. Although the dogs did not have the capacity to understand its contents, their human guardians did. The guardians were able to weigh the risks, however minimal, against the benefits and decide whether it was in the dogs’ best interest to participate. The legal model we used for this process was lifted from the manual on human experimentation. We treated the dogs as if they were human children. But nobody had ever done this before. In the eyes of the law, dogs are still considered property.

The brain-imaging results showed that dogs had mental processes substantially similar to our own. And if that is true, shouldn’t they be afforded rights similar to humans? I suspect that society is many years away from considering that proposition. However, recent rulings by the US Supreme Court have included neuroscientific findings that open the door to such a possibility. In 2010, the court ruled that juvenile offenders cannot be sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. As part of the ruling, the court cited brain-imaging evidence that the human brain is not mature at age thirteen, supporting the notion that children, even teenagers, are not fully responsible for their actions. Although this case has nothing to do with dog sentience, the court opened the door for neuroscience in the courtroom. Perhaps someday we may see a case arguing for a dog’s rights based on brain-imaging findings.

Many people will find the argument for dogs’ rights troubling. After all, most dogs of the world are cared for by no one. Perhaps a fifth of the world dog population is lucky enough to live in the company of humans, and some fraction of those dogs actually live a comfortable life. Most people just don’t care about dogs.

But if dogs have more capacity for social cognition than we previously thought, then we must reevaluate where they belong on the spectrum of animal consciousness. And this necessitates a reevaluation of their rights. Dolphins, whales, chimpanzees, and elephants, for example, have all been recognized as having substantial cognitive capacities, even self-awareness, and as a result are increasingly being protected from hunting (although many people do not recognize these protections). Throughout human history, there has been an undeniable trend toward granting basic rights of self-determination and liberty to groups of people that were once thought inferior. People of color, women, and gays and lesbians have all benefited from a general recognition of equality.

Will animals be next? Because animals cannot speak, it will take a technological revolution like brain imaging to show that they have many of the same mental processes humans do.

Unfortunately, scientists will continue to resist the obvious. Many scientists rely on animals for experimentation. The animals, of course, have no choice in the matter. It is terminal for them. Even within the small group of scientists who have since begun using MRI to study dogs’ brains, there is still a general disregard for the dogs’ welfare. By buying “purpose-bred” dogs, many of these labs continue to support the disgusting industry of breeding dogs specifically for research. And, to my knowledge, my lab is still the only group that cares enough about its canine volunteers to go through the considerable effort of training them to wear ear protection.

We still need animals for research. But the vast majority of this research is currently for humans’ benefit. We need less of that and more research that directly benefits the animals themselves. Let’s start with dogs.

23

Lyra

THE SCIENTIFIC PAPER DESCRIBING our first results with the hand signals was published on a Friday afternoon. The event signaled the conclusion of the first chapter of the Dog Project. For the first time in months, I had a weekend with nothing to do, and I planned to take full advantage of the leisure time.

It was May in Atlanta—one of two perfect times of the year, the other being in October. In these months, and only in these months, the atmosphere achieved a momentary stability as the air from the Gulf of Mexico was perfectly balanced by fronts settling in from the north. The air was warm but not humid. The pollen had disappeared. And the city was lush with new growth.

I lounged on the porch and enjoyed the spring air while Callie bounded in and out of the house with her favorite toy—a blue Kong. The Kong, shaped like a snowman, was just the right size so that Callie could get her mouth around the small end. Amazingly, the squeaker was still intact. She loved to carry it around, teasing me to take it away from her and darting away as soon as I got close. As I dozed off, I could hear her in the distance working the squeaker. The hours slipped away.

Helen woke me.

“Dad,” she said, “Callie is whimpering.”

Callie was in the family room, still chewing and squeaking her Kong. She appeared fine. Except she was chewing and making little whining noises.

I wrestled away the toy and threw it in the other room. Callie retrieved it and settled down just out of my reach, per her usual game. She continued to chew and whine. Callie was not generally a whiner. Apart from the time when she ate her way into the emergency room, I had never heard her complain about anything. Strangely, she seemed fine. I shrugged and told Helen not to worry.

“Maybe she’s inventing a new game.”

I returned to the porch to resume my nap, and Helen went back to playing a video game.

Soon, the sun dipped behind the tall southern pines, signaling the dogs’ feeding time. Callie had stopped chewing and whining and was asleep on the couch. Normally, Lyra would be right there in the kitchen barking up a storm to feed her. I called for her but got no response.

It didn’t take long to find her. She was in the living room, panting heavily. A pile of foul-smelling poop lay next to her.

Oh, Lyra, I thought, another accident. For the last several months, Lyra had intermittently had some mild digestive issues. Maybe once a week she would urp up a small amount of yellow stomach fluid. It never seemed to bother her, and she would always eat normally. It is a fact of living with dogs that from time to time you share your home with their stomach contents. Newton used to love chewing off the tags from articles of clothing. This inevitably resulted in him vomiting a few hours later. You get used to it.