Behind the Behavior » Blog Archive » Modern Animal Behavior: A Lot Has Changed in the Last Few Decades
by CAAB *jim ha*, PhD

__________________
terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF
*wolves R wolves, dogs R dogs, + primates R us.*
tmp, sept-2007

ha, caro!
ya can lead a horse to water... but the horse has to thirst, to drink it.
i would rather teach an elephant to water-ski - i might succeed, at that.
...Now showing!
Pachyderms on parade, what a thrill!...

i know my limits,
--- terry

__________________
terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF
*wolves R wolves, dogs R dogs, + primates R us.*
tmp, sept-2007

Gotta say that I'm guilty of occasionally using 'fixed action pattern.' Though I do make a note to mention it is not really fixed.

bump...................

__________________
terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF
*wolves R wolves, dogs R dogs, + primates R us.*
tmp, sept-2007

hey, nicky! :--)
check the right margin -->> other articles + topics are listed there.

recent blog-entries are on the Left margin <<----
like the Euro-style temp-test given to Entlebuchers at the breed-specialty, Nov. 2009.
enjoy,
--- terry

__________________
terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF
*wolves R wolves, dogs R dogs, + primates R us.*
tmp, sept-2007

Article OK except for where it claims "Domestic dogs are evolved directly from gray wolves: the evidence is quite clear on that now".
So dogs have evolved into the myriad forms we see now, whilst wolves have remained unchanged? I don't buy that. Wolves will have continued to evolve too in terms of both their physiology and behaviour. Sure, they're closely related but if we see dogs and wolves as having evolved along different paths from a common proto-wolf/proto-dog ancestor, that will probably give a more accurate and usable picture.
After all, sociologists don't draw conclusions about human society by looking at Chimps.

hey, ziggy! :--)

i did not get that impression whilst reading it -
and for myself, i would refer to *evolving* only when it was not directed by humans.
the selection-pressure on dom-dogs by ppl has been increasingly heavy, with much of it over the past 500 years,
and the past 300 years culminated in the *eugenics* rooted push for purebreds and appearances, breed-type, and form,
vs the previous several centuries where functional and behavioral type, not breed type, was the desired end.

a herding-type dog has a fairly broad range of similar behavioral characters, and can have a number of coats, colors, etc;
a show-lines BC and a working-lines BC are rapidly differentiating due to human selection, which i would not call evolution;
evolution selects for fitness. (shrug) humans do not.

a Laekenois + Malinois look superficially different, but can be born siblings; however a BC and a Pumi look nothing alike,
but share defining behavioral characteristics - which clearly designate them both as herding types.

the mastiff-family is a huge group of breeds and types, but again they share behavioral similarities, as well as broad similarities in appearance.

as a general rule...
the more modern a breed is, the more they have generally suffered from human-interference and become exaggerated; U cannot tell me that a Neo, with their profoundly-mashed face, drooping flews and haws, excessive wrinkle, stenotic nares + sinuses, massively over-developed frame and often poor joints, is as healthy a breed as the Spanish Mastiff, which is far more traditional and often still a working breed, not a consumer statement...
like a Ferrari in the driveway, a Neo is one of the breeds that says, *i have arrived - i have $$ to spend on appearances; no safe, long-lived, functional Volvos for me, baby... i want flash! *

some of the behavioral changes have been to a breeds distinct detriment - we now have Malinois who are so hot-to-trot and manic, they can only be described as neurotic, and hunting-lines Labs who are so driven and needy of interaction and activity, that they are impossible in pet-homes.
a hunting-lines Lab and a pet-lines Lab may look very much alike, but behaviorally they might as well be different species.

selection that focuses on ONE trait is especially damaging - phrases like *a head breed* make me wince; if the only thing U look at to evaluate a prospective dam or stud is from the neck-up, bad outcomes are assured.

Industrial-Ag made the development of super-lean pigs a priority; they got the super-lean pigs they wanted, but the animals were behavioral train-wrecks - neurotic, obsessive, with an incredibly low threshold for startle and emotional trauma; they bit one anothers tails off, could not relax and gain weight and grow, but agitated themselves and others by constant pointless activity.
dog-breeders should take good heed of that Ag-Biz debacle, i think - we are in danger of doing similar things across multiple breeds, and some breeds have already gotten there, IMO.

the eejits currently breeding fighting-dogs are among the most flagrant examples of stoopid selection toward a single trait -
these fools BRAG that they have dams who must be separated from their litters 4 to 5 weeks after whelping, as they may attack their pups; some separate by sexes as well, to save the smaller Fs from early scarring by the slightly-larger Ms.
old-fashioned dogmen of the 1890s thru the 1930s would be appalled; they were well-aware of the key importance of temperament, and they bragged that their fighting-dogs could be walked down the street off-leash, or even be attacked by another dog and not react, if there was no genuine threat to their safety.
that was the era of the White Gentleman, the Engl-Bull-Terrier - then best known for a happy, clownish demeanor, their love of children and rough and tumble play, and stoically tolerant of snippy dogs or pushy pups.
that long-suffering tolerance has gone by the wayside, in many cases; they are still playful, resilient and muleheaded, but not so easygoing.

exaggeration IMO is not a healthy thing, in physical-form or behavior.
all my best,
--- terry

__________________
terry pride, APDT-Aus, apdt#1827, CVA, TDF
*wolves R wolves, dogs R dogs, + primates R us.*
tmp, sept-2007

Not all evolution in dogs is human-directed. For instance we did not give them a longer gut, they evolved that for themselves. They are supposed to have diverged from proto-wolves some 15,000 years ago, most breeding of dogs by humans as we know it today has been done within the last 2,000 years, and most of that within the last 500 to 700 from what little evidence there is. What I meant by the huge divergence was between the heavy coated northern spitz types to the barely-coated dogs from the equatorial region, and everything between that has developed to fit into the various climatic situations and habitats, and the way those have fitted in around emergent human societies.
Do you think wolves haven't evolved?

Can't find that one....
Give us a clue Terry, pretty-please?

__________________
‎