|
| Author |
Messages |
|
cwalt
MH
Posts:180
 |
| 10/18/2008 12:11 AM |
|
|
I have long insisted that dogs were domesticated long before the former
oldest record at about 15,000 years since the skeletal data show that
the dog was already domesticated when it came across the Bering Strait
land bridge in the last ice age. A prehistoric skull of a dog dating to
31,700 years ago has been excavated at Goyet Cave in Belgium. This
raises the age of the oldest known dog by more than 17 thousand years.
There are also tracks in the cave of a dog and a child. The dogs were
something like huskies and about the size of a German shepherd. As of
31,700 years ago dogs were anatomically quite definitely different than
wolves.
Cj |
|
|
|
|
mcotton
MH
Posts:87
|
| 10/20/2008 2:52 AM |
|
| Some good data on this topic in a book I'm reading, Merles Door.
Ed Bailey recommended it Cj, and it's an enjoyable read as well as
informative.
It seems 40 thou years there is records of wolves or domesticated type
wolves being buried with people, and mitochondrial (sp?) DNA testing has
shown the originator of the domestic dog was the Asiatic wolf. Provides
info that wolves and men were together before men began to farm crops. Also
the mito-whatever DNA testing showed all races of man tested stem from one
woman in Africa. Not much heard about that one eh?
Marg
>
>
> I have long insisted that dogs were domesticated long before the former
> oldest record at about 15,000 years since the skeletal data show that the
> dog was already domesticated when it came across the Bering Strait land
> bridge in the last ice age. A prehistoric skull of a dog dating to 31,700
> years ago has been excavated at Goyet Cave in Belgium. This raises the
> age of the oldest known dog by more than 17 thousand years. There are
> also tracks in the cave of a dog and a child. The dogs were something
> like huskies and about the size of a German shepherd. As of 31,700 years
> ago dogs were anatomically quite definitely different than wolves.
> Cj
|
|
|
|
|
cwalt
MH
Posts:180
|
| 10/20/2008 10:17 AM |
|
| Margaret Cotton wrote:
> Some good data on this topic in a book I'm reading, Merles Door.
> Ed Bailey recommended it Cj, and it's an enjoyable read as well as
> informative.
> It seems 40 thou years there is records of wolves or domesticated type
> wolves being buried with people, and mitochondrial (sp?) DNA testing
> has shown the originator of the domestic dog was the Asiatic wolf.
> Provides info that wolves and men were together before men began to
> farm crops. Also the mito-whatever DNA testing showed all races of man
> tested stem from one woman in Africa. Not much heard about that one eh?
>
> Marg
Well actually we can say that all modern humans derived their
mitochondrial DNA from the mitochondrial DNA of one female that lived in
Africa xxx years ago. Since mitochondria in the body cells are
inherited only from the mother line through the ovum they may well
represent only the first mitochondria that inhabited human cells.
Mitochondria are apparently bacteria that became parasitic or symbionts
within body cells earlier in the evolution of animals, an endosymbiotic
theory advanced by Lynn Margulis, a biologist at Boston University. Her
ideas are pretty well accepted by most modern biologists. Today
mitochondria are so well integrated with human cells that they can only
live within our cells and have no independent existence. Since
mitochondria are discrete organelles in cells they have their own DNA
that isn't, in theory, originated from the host cell's DNA. Of course
mitochondrial DNA evolves through mutations just as does our cellular
DNA and so we have unique DNA lineages that can be traced.
Dogs are the most genetically plastic species on the planet, a fact that
probably depends on more than 30,000 years of selective breeding in
multiple different patterns. The end result is that you cannot get to a
real wolf by crossing all the breeds of dogs to get a singular wolf DNA
pattern, wild dogs don't drift back or revert to wolves. The Australian
Dingo was a domesticated dog that came to the continent with humans and
became secondarily wild and you can see that Dingo isn't like a wolf.
The Dingo is almost extinct now having interbred with so many other
domestic dogs although there are some efforts to save the species by
captive breeding. In my view dogs are not wolves and haven't been for
tens of thousands of years. Basic dog social behavior is similar to
that of wolves but isn't anywhere nearly identical and those who train
dogs trying to use the popularized wolf behavior models of a linear
dominance hierarchy based on aggression are sadly misled.
Cj |
|
|
|
|
rospigan
MH
Posts:372
|
| 10/20/2008 11:53 AM |
|
|
Cj wrote:
>>Of
course mitochondrial DNA evolves through mutations just as does our cellular
DNA and so we have unique DNA lineages that can be
traced.>>
Reminds me of something I read in a book about
birddogs, written in around 1914. The book is otherwise excellent, considering
the time it was written in, but there is one thing that caught my eye. There is
a reference to the Russian researcher Ivan Pavlov who made experiments with
conditioned reflexes in dogs but also other animals. In the book it is referred
to, and I believe this is not a correct understanding of Pavlov's experiments,
or the experiments must be faulty in some way: Pavlov let untrained white-
(laboratory-) mice hear a specific sound and disposed food to them at the same
time or shortly afterwards. He had to do this 300 times before the mice made the
connection between the sound and the food. However, the next generation from
these now trained mice made the connection after only 100 times. One more
downline generation from these mice made it in ....say 10
repetitions. Pavlov did not continue the experiments with the mice but
concluded that still another downline generation of these mice would make the
connection between the sound and the food without any training at
all!
Now, this perhaps suggest that we only have to
train 3 - 4 generations of birddogs and then their progeny will need no training
at all, to do what we want them to do! In the prolongation the desire to
make war could be bred out of humans in 3 - 4 generations! What about that
folks? Fantastic if true..........unfortunately I have never studied
Pavlov from the books he probably wrote.
However, if Mr. Pavlov had made very selective
breeding of the mice, he could have bred in sagacity in 30 - 40 generations, or
outbred the sagacity in 3 - 4 generations if he had bred without any selection
at all. That is if mice and dogs can be bred in about the same
fashion.
Torsti
"Merciful God the Almighty! Deprive me
my common sense so that I
can at
least to some extent accomplish my
commitments as
a citizen of
the European Union!."
|
|
|
|
|
rospigan
MH
Posts:372
|
| 10/20/2008 12:22 PM |
|
|
> Basic
dog social behaviour is similar to
that of wolves but isn't anywhere nearly
identical and those who train
dogs trying to use the popularised wolf
behavior models of a linear
dominance hierarchy based on aggression are
sadly misled.
Cj>>
A short time a go I wrote about the 3 Irish setters
that visited us for a short week. The youngest one (10 months) is a bold
and courageous nice little bitch but had got the hold of her family. I started
the training by putting a chain (choke) collar on her with the aim to make her
to heel to start with. She was totally wild and any jerk in the collar was
fruitless. She had by her family been used to jerks in the collar, followed by
nothing else, simple as that. So I started to hang the dog from the collar,
until she started to writhe and scream in pain or discomfort. Then I slowly
lowered her to the ground and gave her a short command "sit". I had to repeat
this many times for say 20 minutes before she was able to walk to heel and do it
without dipping her nose to the ground or to bolt at any outside stimuli, like a
songbird. Afterwards she had full confidence with me and wanted be with me all
the time.
The question now is: Is this what you mean with
"aggression" ? In my opinion it is not. It is just a demonstration of
determination and consistence.
I have to ask this to make sure that we are on
"the same wave-length", and speak in the same language - in other words
understand each other despite of slightly different cultures..
Torsti
"Merciful God the Almighty! Deprive me
my common sense so that I
can at
least to some extent accomplish my
commitments as
a citizen of
the European Union!."
|
|
|
|
|
rospigan
MH
Posts:372
|
| 10/22/2008 2:44 AM |
|
I
asked the Swedish ethologist Erik Wilson about the subject of aggression as
a mean of training, and if we can refer to the origin of the dog when training
it. This is his answer, translated by me to english, to the best of my
ability.
"""""""""""""""""
Quote:
It is actually not that much about the exactness of the origin of the dog,
whether the origin is the grey wolf of today or the timber wolf. The origin,
however, is definitely a now extinct subspecies of the wolf
family.
The
basics for social collaboration are about the same, not only for the majority of
the social animals within the wolf family, but also for the majority of social
mammals. The basic for all social behaviour is aggression. It can be found among
every species and the purpose is primary to increase the distance between the
individuals.
Therefore,
in order to be able to live together, aggression-dampening behaviours must
evolve. These aggression-dampening behaviours have then been ritualised to
social signals with the purpose to strengthen the ties between the individuals.
It
is not correct to say that the order of rank is built on aggression, but
aggression is an important component when the order of rank is established.
Aggression leads to the development of aggression dampening behaviours, an
expression of submission, signals of appease etc. that when they work leads to a
harmonious life between two individuals. The order of rank is a simultaneous
expression of both dominance and submission.
In
the domestic dog the dominance has gradually weakened since most of the dog
owners are not able to handle dominant dogs. This evolution has in all
probability accelerated lately as a result of todays methods of training. The
possibility to castrate male dogs has possibly contributed to the
opposite.
Whatever,
the question about a dogs origin can never tell us how to train dogs. We know
relatively well how to train dogs efficiently with a fast and good result. The
question is more about what methods are considered as politically correct.
Unquote.
""""""""""""""""""""""""
So
I guess there is a consensus to what Cj wrote:
>>>Basic
dog social behavior is similar to
that of wolves but isn't anywhere nearly
identical and those who train
dogs trying to use the popularized wolf
behavior models of a linear
dominance hierarchy based on aggression are
sadly misled.>>>
Torsti
"Merciful God the Almighty! Deprive me
my
common sense so that I can at
least to some extent accomplish
my
commitments as a citizen of
the European
Union!."
|
|
|
|
|
cwalt
MH
Posts:180
|
| 10/22/2008 5:46 AM |
|
| Maud & Torsti wrote:
> A short time a go I wrote about the 3 Irish setters that visited us
> for a short week. The youngest one (10 months) is a bold and
> courageous nice little bitch but had got the hold of her family. I
> started the training by putting a chain (choke) collar on her with the
> aim to make her to heel to start with. She was totally wild and any
> jerk in the collar was fruitless. She had by her family been used to
> jerks in the collar, followed by nothing else, simple as that. So I
> started to hang the dog from the collar, until she started to writhe
> and scream in pain or discomfort. Then I slowly lowered her to the
> ground and gave her a short command "sit". I had to repeat this many
> times for say 20 minutes before she was able to walk to heel and do it
> without dipping her nose to the ground or to bolt at any outside
> stimuli, like a songbird. Afterwards she had full confidence with me
> and wanted be with me all the time.
> The question now is: Is this what you mean with "aggression" ? In my opinion it is not. It is just a demonstration of determination and consistence.
>
> I have to ask this to make sure that we are on "the same wave-length", and speak in the same language - in other words understand each other despite of slightly different cultures..
>
> Torsti
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
What you demonstrated with the Irish setter was the power of heeling in
organizing the deference relationship between a human and a dog. That
she was confident in you after the 'heeling' treatment should always be
expected if the heeling treatment is appropriate. No doubt many dog
owners would be horrified at your treatment of the dog but the dog's
response demonstrated that proper heeling straightens out the
relationship with a dog no matter how that obedience is created.
Begging is inefficient but I believe heeling by any means is an
important step in gaining the dog's confidence and you do what you have
to do to. Dogs are a lot tougher than people and a bit of insistence
doesn't bother them a bit.
The resistant dog isn't being aggressive, it's just insisting that it
doesn't want to obey you. Once the dog defers to you the conflict is
over and the dog will cooperate. The method you used was force
training, simple insistence that the dog must obey the command. You
could have achieved the same results in an hour of nagging or 20
minutes of force, either way the dog finally gives in and accepts you as
the pack leader. From the dog's viewpoint there was no growling or
biting, you were insistent but not aggressive. Once you are the pack
leader the dog defers to you and the pack bond has been correctly
established. As with all training sometimes you have to reinforce the
heeling with a spirited dog but it always turns out right if you insist
on it. A little heeling every day reminds the dog who the pack leader is.
Cj |
|
|
|
|
rospigan
MH
Posts:372
|
| 10/22/2008 10:24 AM |
|
|
Cj wrote:
>>doesn't bother them a bit. >>><
Yes, we often miss-interpret their response to
"determined" treatment and very fast they learn to use it to their
advantage. Having said that I also have to say that this was the first
time I seriously tried the method of lifting the entire dog in the lead. I felt
that the young dog is mentally very strong and having been neglected for so long
I wanted a fast response so that I could start with "ordinary" heeling
work.
Maud has used the method for some years but as long
as I have felt that I can solve the problem with softer methods I have avoided
it. I am probably softer with dogs than she is...
For example you can make the dog to sit by lifting
it slightly with the lead but many dogs respond much faster if you just
give them a light jerk up with the lead and simultaneously with your left hand
give them a light but fast pat on the rear end.
In the end it all boils down to when the training
has started. If started with the small puppy then it rapidly learns to pay
attention to you and later more serious obedience training is a pleasure, rather
than heavy repair work.
Torsti
"Merciful God the Almighty! Deprive me
my common sense so that I
can at
least to some extent accomplish my
commitments as
a citizen of
the European Union!."
|
|
|
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
|
ActiveForums 3.7
|
You must be logged in to use this module.
|