Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I've read and watched different sites and posts regarding this, so please don't get tired about this topic.

Dodger is fine with his collar, and about a week ago I started to walk him just couple of houses down from ours. He scared at first, and I did the watching scenes on front porch first, then to our sidewalk, next door house, etc.

My dilemma:
I read that DO NOT LET HE/SHE PULL rule. I do not want to be seen like im abusing my puppy, but he keep doing that. He would sniff on everything. Some thread I read said that it is okay to stop and let the puppy to sniff around, but isn't that the same thing for letting your puppy pull/lead you instead?
Most of the times I stop or walking to an opposite way whenever he starts to pull, he would stop too but when he really stubborn he would get agitated then whining. Then when i start walking, he would right away pulling me (more like he tries to running home) again. What should I do? I feel really bad because it almost like choking him. Oh also, I did bring treats with me, and when he really stubborn it just did not work :(

Also, there is this post suggested to walk a puppy ( which i believe those active ones like mine for instance) like 3 times a day. Is this common?

I'm working on "heel" him right now, just inside the house. Should he get this mastered then do the walk outside??

I haven't taken him to a dog park yet. I'm kinda worried and thought doing things step by step first. Am i wrong? He seems lost his attention to me when we are outside.

Again, sorry for this common question. I hate to ask, but I did my reasearch and still need some advice.

Thank you!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,350 Posts
Lots of puppies don't take to walking easily. Don't get discouraged! You are right to not "let" him pull, as if you do, he will get used to it, and it will be harder to break the habit. BUT, at the same time, you do have to exercise him, so he gets rid of his pent up energy. The question is, how do you exercise him if his walks are so short and not really providing much in the way of exercise.
Do you have a fenced in yard? Or a field nearby that is fenced in, where you could let him run, and you could play with him? Dogs love chase, and he might take to fetch well. Try to exercise him a lot through play BEFORE you walk him, that way, he may be too tired to do a lot of pulling, and trying to get you to go somewhere.

Also, there is a difference between "heel" and loose leash walking. Loose leash walking is basically what it says, the dog is allowed to be a bit ahead or behind the owner, as long as the leash has some slack (is loose). Try a search on this forum for loose leash walking (LLW).

I personally don't require "heel" from my dogs on their walks, most of the time, but they do know that command, and, if, for any reason, I need them right next to me, they will respond to the command. Otherwise, we require loose leash walking. And, if they stop to sniff at something, I let them, for a bit, and then "let's go" means move along.

So, yes, you should probably keep stopping when he pulls. Wait for him to come back to you, or at least let them leash slacken a little, and then praise him and go on. OR, turning around and walking several steps in the opposite direction, as you are doing, and then turn back the original way.

If he stops and just whines to continue on, distract him by giving him a command he knows, like "sit" or "down", to get him working, and then, try to continue on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,598 Posts
Just a random addition - puppies aren't born knowing what a "walk" is :) They just think they're outside ready to sniff and go where they please. They get all excited about all the new smells and sights. It might be helpful to go on a group walk with a friend with an older dog.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Yes, we do have a fenced yard but I have never tried to play with him before I walk him. Today I will try to do that. Thank you!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19 Posts
Before putting the leash on him, wait for him to calm down. Before opening the door, wait for him to calm down. Before stepping outside the door, wait for him to calm down. Before beginning your walk after closing and locking the door, wait for him to calm down. Doing all this sets the tone for the rest of your walk. If you start with him excited, he may just stay excited!

Walks shouldn't be all about sniffing. They are about migrating just like wolves do in the wild... the hunt for food. They are very organized. Give him a few minutes each walk to sniff around and explore, but most of it should be following either next to you or behind you. Don't let him go out in front. Keep the leash short. Walk confidently like you are the king of the world... he will take hint to your mood!

One more tip... always walk out the door first, and walk back in the house first. You are the leader after all!

Good luck!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,391 Posts
Consider This way- Heeling is a precise walk from point A to B. A walk is a more relaxed exercise and social event to help bonding and getting accustomed to the outside.

As suggested, Google for "silky leash" and for "loose leash" .

Also, don't let him pull, but do let him sniff a little... It is a balancing act...

Got pictures?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,350 Posts
Before putting the leash on him, wait for him to calm down. Before opening the door, wait for him to calm down. Before stepping outside the door, wait for him to calm down. Before beginning your walk after closing and locking the door, wait for him to calm down. Doing all this sets the tone for the rest of your walk. If you start with him excited, he may just stay excited!

Walks shouldn't be all about sniffing. They are about migrating just like wolves do in the wild... the hunt for food. They are very organized. Give him a few minutes each walk to sniff around and explore, but most of it should be following either next to you or behind you. Don't let him go out in front. Keep the leash short. Walk confidently like you are the king of the world... he will take hint to your mood!

One more tip... always walk out the door first, and walk back in the house first. You are the leader after all!

Good luck!
Again with the wolves/dominance junk. This has been disproved.
Walks ARE excellent ways to get in some mental and physical exercise. Mental from all the sights, sounds, and smells that they encounter and are curious about, as well as any training/commands you use during your walks. And, physical is pretty obvious.
They aren't migrating.

Insisting they walk behind you? I can see right next to you, if you MUST. But, if you insist on him walking behind you how do you keep your eyes on him? Eyes in the back of your head? How do you know he hasn't found something dangerous to eat that you didn't see? How do you PREVENT him from reacting to a trigger if you CAN'T see what he's doing?

As for going into the house/out of the house first, if it's safer or more convenient for you, sure, but not to show him you are the boss. That's silly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
I did try to play with him first before we walk, it is actually works! He is calmer and focus one me. But, when we are on our way back home he WANTS to go home! Today I challanged him to do 2 blocks, and yeah...it was more like a challange for me on our way back home..lol. Should have sticked just with one block until he gets the hang of it :D

Thank you guys! I am trying every suggestion you've put.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,391 Posts
I do agree with Stevej9 about calming the dog... take it up a notch to Nothing in Life is Free (NILIF) and ask him to sit, before doing anything - Sit before attaching the leash, Sit before going out the door (you or him first, as you desire or is most convenient), and so on. He can be as excited and wriggly as he wants.... as long as his butt is on the ground!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,186 Posts
Again with the wolves/dominance junk. This has been disproved.
Walks ARE excellent ways to get in some mental and physical exercise. Mental from all the sights, sounds, and smells that they encounter and are curious about, as well as any training/commands you use during your walks. And, physical is pretty obvious.
They aren't migrating.

Insisting they walk behind you? I can see right next to you, if you MUST. But, if you insist on him walking behind you how do you keep your eyes on him? Eyes in the back of your head? How do you know he hasn't found something dangerous to eat that you didn't see? How do you PREVENT him from reacting to a trigger if you CAN'T see what he's doing?

As for going into the house/out of the house first, if it's safer or more convenient for you, sure, but not to show him you are the boss. That's silly.
This. Wolves don't migrate, geese migrate. Also, dogs aren't wolves.

If I had Kabota next to be or behind me on our walks, he'd be dead by now, and I've only had him 4 months. He's highly food motivated and had been starved half to death by his previous owners, so if he can fit it in his mouth, he's eating it, no matter what it is. I need to see what he's doing at all times during walks, and for that, Kabota needs to be in front of me. I also have to open doors for him (curiously, he lacks thumbs), so he goes out/in first and waits while I close the door.

Despite this, Kabota is well behaved, listens to commands and is even starting to get "leave it", which is a miracle.

Moral of the story: dominance is bunk.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,391 Posts
Oh no... now we're bringing in migrating, dominant geese... I used to hate it as a child at the duck pond when the geese would chase me and try to goose me... I was happy when they migrated, because they were no longer dominant... :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
574 Posts
Again with the wolves/dominance junk. This has been disproved.>>>>

I hate to go here.:laugh:

but

Yes, wolves are not dogs. and dominance (depending on definition) may have at best a limited role in training However how has dominance been "disproved"? I think the role and understanding of dominance has been advanced and altered but not disproven.

In fact NILF is increasing your status by controlling resources.

If one makes a dog sit and wait to go out the door second (because IM the Leader) or because Im practicing NILF isnt the end result the same?

I could not help myself:redface:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,420 Posts
I would only add that you need to be patient, put getting the proper behavior above getting the walk done even if you don't make it a single block in distance for the first 100 walks.. Be more patient than you think you need to be.. You have to make what you want to have happen happen, the dog has to learn what behavior you want and learn to decide to do it and learn self control. That takes a lot of patience with some dogs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
869 Posts
Again with the wolves/dominance junk. This has been disproved.>>>>

I hate to go here.:laugh:

but

Yes, wolves are not dogs. and dominance (depending on definition) may have at best a limited role in training However how has dominance been "disproved"? I think the role and understanding of dominance has been advanced and altered but not disproven.

In fact NILF is increasing your status by controlling resources.

If one makes a dog sit and wait to go out the door second (because IM the Leader) or because Im practicing NILF isnt the end result the same?

I could not help myself:redface:

Good points, and those are familiar arguments in the dominance debate. As I understand, dominance theory, as originally proposed in the 40s by some wolf researchers and then applied to dogs, has been proven to be incorrect. In that way, you can say that dominance theory has been disproven. But you are right, most just have a cloudy view on dominance and it's hard to disprove something that's not well defined to begin with.

Does controlling the dog's resources make the dog see you as a "dominant" animal or just a necessary obstacle to obtaining what he wants? Someone who wants to have a nice walk with a dog needs to first learn to train the dog to LLW, does that make the dog dominant because he is an obstacle to the human or the human dominant because he is teaching the dog? The relationship is too dynamic to simplify into simple dominant and non-dominant roles.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,420 Posts
Again with the wolves/dominance junk. This has been disproved.
Walks ARE excellent ways to get in some mental and physical exercise. Mental from all the sights, sounds, and smells that they encounter and are curious about, as well as any training/commands you use during your walks. And, physical is pretty obvious.
They aren't migrating.

Insisting they walk behind you? I can see right next to you, if you MUST. But, if you insist on him walking behind you how do you keep your eyes on him? Eyes in the back of your head? How do you know he hasn't found something dangerous to eat that you didn't see? How do you PREVENT him from reacting to a trigger if you CAN'T see what he's doing?

As for going into the house/out of the house first, if it's safer or more convenient for you, sure, but not to show him you are the boss. That's silly.
I didn't see him mention wolves nor dominance at all..

I think the word he wanted was closer to patrolling/hunting/scavenging than migrating, as all territorial mammals patrol their territory, and social hunting/scavenging mammals travel to hunt/scavenge, which includes both dogs and humans... And usually with both dogs and humans there is a leader, and cooperation, and some sort of rules or expectation of roles.

As for going in and out first, I do that too.. Mainly because I don't want to set an expectation for my dog she can bolt out whenever the door opens, and she needs to defer to me before she ever steps through that door. Well the front door anyway, she slides out the back door instantly when I open it and she's always out before I am and that's ok.

The front door and garage doors have different rules though, I always go out first, and come in first. I'm the boss, I set the rules, and I enforce the rules.

For a person to even establish a rule and an expectation for another to defer to it some authority must exist for the other to defer to that rule over their desires, and for that authority to exist it must be first established. Establishing that authority is just as clearly stated by saying "showing who is the boss", nothing silly about it.

Me going in and out first is a very clear way to establish that authority and make the rule clear and easy to follow and set the expectation that my dog must defer to me and have permission to go through the door always.. It has got nothing to do with wolves or old outdated wolf studies, I have rules for anyone who lives in or visits my house, dog human or otherwise, I am the boss, the leader, the person with the authority, and I enforce those rules...

For that to happen I must bring that expectation into existence that a rule exists and bring the expectation that it should be followed into existence, which means I must bring the deference to my authority into existence, which is essentially showing who is the boss.

I for one find it quite tedious with folks popping up with this tired "dominance has been disproved" BS every time someone hits one of their keywords like leader, or going through door first, especially when it has little or nothing whatsoever to do with the persons post they are replying to.

Dominance exists in -most- relationships between individuals to some degree and in some fashion. I am an employer, I am dominant in the relationship between me and my employees. If I am a parent I am dominant in the relationship with my kids. A cop is dominant in his relationship with me. I am dominant in the relationship with my dog. It has nothing to do with folks like Mech or Schenkel, Rabb, Fox, or Zimen or their limited studies on wolves or what they have or haven't proved or disproved.

I see my relationship with my dog more as a parent, and I believe it's the closest analogy I have heard described. I don't think many would argue against the statement that a parent is dominant in the parent child relationship. This is exactly what Mech who "disproved" prior "dominance theory" from previous captive wolf studies expressly stated, that the dominant wolves in the pack are the breeding parents, not that dominance doesn't exist, just that it isn't gained by force and fought over and contested constantly as previously described by folks like Schenkel..

Or in the words Dr. Mech who is touted as being the man who disproved "dominance theory" himself.. "Calling a wolf an alpha is usually no more appropriate than referring to a human parent or a doe deer as an alpha. Any parent is dominant to its young offspring, so "alpha" adds no information."

So although old studies had been corrected, that in no way means dominance doesn't exists in wolf packs, only that it is established in a different manner in a natural wolf pack, and not gained by force and fought over as previously believed. A quite common misunderstanding of the science, and quite unfortunately IMO parroted out on forums with little real understanding.

What was really disproved is that unrelated wolves brought together in captivity do not form packs like a natural parental packs in the wild..

That is about all that has been disproved from what I can see.. And that the dominant wolves in a natural pack are still dominant, but they are simply dominant because they are the parents and ALL parents are naturally dominant in the parent offspring relationship. NOT that dominance doesn't exist, quite the contrary. It does exist, simply a new dominance theory of the wolf pack replaced the old one.

But that has limited applicability to dogs, as dogs are not wolves and don't behave like mature wolves.

Modern science has also described dogs as perpetual juvenile wolves behaviorally, that dogs behavior is very much like a juvenile wolf that never matures. Exactly the same as the behavioral differences between many domesticated animals and their wild counterparts and most recently and clearly shown in the 50 years of foxes bred for friendliness to humans in Russia.. who have pretty much all the exact same differences between them and wild foxes as dogs have between them and wolves both behaviorally and visually..

Domestication and breeding for tameness it seems is actually precisely selecting for juvenile traits. Creating permanent juveniles. Or simply stated we are creating child versions of the wild animal that never grow up and we assume their parental role, the dominant role, and that IS domestication..

Sigh... the whole inaccurate "this has been disproven" junk is becoming as much of a pet peeve as anything to do with those keywords seems to be for the people who spout it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
869 Posts
I didn't see him mention wolves nor dominance at all..

I think the word he wanted was closer to patrolling/hunting/scavenging than migrating, as all territorial mammals patrol their territory, and social hunting/scavenging mammals travel to hunt/scavenge, which includes both dogs and humans... And usually with both dogs and humans there is a leader, and cooperation, and some sort of rules or expectation of roles.
The guy's posts are all just regurgitating Cesar Millan quotes. The whole migrating idea is straight from Cesar Millan's "Cesar's Way".



For a person to even establish a rule and an expectation for another to defer to it some authority must exist for the other to defer to that rule over their desires, and for that authority to exist it must be first established. Establishing that authority is just as clearly stated by saying "showing who is the boss", nothing silly about it.

Me going in and out first is a very clear way to establish that authority and make the rule clear and easy to follow and set the expectation that my dog must defer to me and have permission to go through the door always.. It has got nothing to do with wolves or old outdated wolf studies, I have rules for anyone who lives in or visits my house, dog human or otherwise, I am the boss, the leader, the person with the authority, and I enforce those rules...
Just because you see it that way, as you being an authority figure, does not mean that that concept exists in the minds of others.



Dominance exists in -most- relationships between individuals to some degree and in some fashion. I am an employer, I am dominant in the relationship between me and my employees. If I am a parent I am dominant in the relationship with my kids. A cop is dominant in his relationship with me. I am dominant in the relationship with my dog. It has nothing to do with folks like Mech or Schenkel, Rabb, Fox, or Zimen or their limited studies on wolves or what they have or haven't proved or disproved.

I see my relationship with my dog more as a parent, and I believe it's the closest analogy I have heard described. I don't think many would argue against the statement that a parent is dominant in the parent child relationship. This is exactly what Mech who "disproved" prior "dominance theory" from previous captive wolf studies expressly stated, that the dominant wolves in the pack are the breeding parents, not that dominance doesn't exist, just that it isn't gained by force and fought over and contested constantly as previously described by folks like Schenkel..
If you wish to describe your relationship with your employees or your children as "dominant", fine. To me, any relationship is too dynamic to be described by the word dominant. Saying you are dominant over your children gives very little information about your relationship with your children, and quite frankly sounds a little scary. The give and take that happens in a relationship that has mutual communication cannot be summed up as "dominant", even if one person holds a superior position.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,350 Posts
Again with the wolves/dominance junk. This has been disproved.>>>>

I hate to go here.:laugh:

but

Yes, wolves are not dogs. and dominance (depending on definition) may have at best a limited role in training However how has dominance been "disproved"? I think the role and understanding of dominance has been advanced and altered but not disproven.

In fact NILF is increasing your status by controlling resources.

If one makes a dog sit and wait to go out the door second (because IM the Leader) or because Im practicing NILF isnt the end result the same?

I could not help myself:redface:
Maybe I should have been more clear, but I thought it was pretty obvious, I meant the "dominance philosophy" that basically says you have to dominate your dog. You know, the philosophy that was based on flawed, and later disproved study on wolves. The authors of the study themselves recanted, and said their findings were based on erroneous information, and that the studies were not accurate.

As for NILIF vs being the "leader," I think you are confused. NILIF doesn't have to mean "sit and wait to go out the door second (beause I'm the leader)." It does recommend things like sitting before being given their food, or sitting before getting to play with a toy, or sitting before putting the leash on for a walk, or sitting before going out the door, but, going out the door SECOND isn't necessarily part of it. The important part is showing good manners before ANYTHING, eating, going out through a door, whatever. Being second doesn't have to a part of it unless you want it to.

Many people want their dogs to go out second for SAFETY, so that they don't trip over their dogs, or so that their dogs don't run into them, knock them over, etc. But, that's not about being dominant over your dog.

NILIF teaches impulse control and manners. You reward their "manners" with attention and/or treats and/or activities.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
574 Posts
NILIF teaches impulse control and manners. You reward their "manners" with attention and/or treats and/or activities.>>>


through control of resources which Sopia Lin constantly states is the definition of being dominant. And as I stated the end result is the same regardless if the trainer is doing it to be a leader or for manners (thats a complexity that only exists in your head if the actions are the same)

I believe Dr. Frank Beach's 30-year study on dog packs show pretty ridged hierarchy's (esp in males).

getting off subject to much
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,350 Posts
I didn't see him mention wolves nor dominance at all..

Actually, he (stevej9) did. He said "Walks shouldn't be all about sniffing. They are migrating just like wolves do in the wild..."

I think the word he wanted was closer to patrolling/hunting/scavenging than migrating, as all territorial mammals patrol their territory, and social hunting/scavenging mammals travel to hunt/scavenge, which includes both dogs and humans... And usually with both dogs and humans there is a leader, and cooperation, and some sort of rules or expectation of roles.

As for going in and out first, I do that too.. Mainly because I don't want to set an expectation for my dog she can bolt out whenever the door opens, and she needs to defer to me before she ever steps through that door. Well the front door anyway, she slides out the back door instantly when I open it and she's always out before I am and that's ok.

The front door and garage doors have different rules though, I always go out first, and come in first. I'm the boss, I set the rules, and I enforce the rules.

For a person to even establish a rule and an expectation for another to defer to it some authority must exist for the other to defer to that rule over their desires, and for that authority to exist it must be first established. Establishing that authority is just as clearly stated by saying "showing who is the boss", nothing silly about it.


Deference and authority is different than dominating. My problem with "dominating" (or the use of forms of the word) is that many people who come here looking for advice may hear the "dominance" stuff, and their idea of what that entails may include alpha rolling, pinning, hitting, among other things. I would hate for someone to believe the stuff about how you have to pin your dog when he does something you don't like so that you can show him who's boss, or to believe that you have to roll your dog so that he will listen to you next time, or any number of things that people may think of when they hear "dominance theory".
I still remember reading "The Other End of the Leash," especially the part where the author recounts the story of a young puppy that had been rolled, pinned, shaken, etc., because the owners thought that was current puppy training technique. Patricia McConnell said the owners hated doing it, but were following advice they had been given.(not by her) Well, the puppy's growling went to snapping, and that went to biting (because she was being bullied by her owners.) So, they put down a 6 month old puppy. It's so easy for those who don't know any better to take the "dominance theory" and run with it, so to speak.

Me going in and out first is a very clear way to establish that authority and make the rule clear and easy to follow and set the expectation that my dog must defer to me and have permission to go through the door always.. It has got nothing to do with wolves or old outdated wolf studies, I have rules for anyone who lives in or visits my house, dog human or otherwise, I am the boss, the leader, the person with the authority, and I enforce those rules...

For that to happen I must bring that expectation into existence that a rule exists and bring the expectation that it should be followed into existence, which means I must bring the deference to my authority into existence, which is essentially showing who is the boss.

I for one find it quite tedious with folks popping up with this tired "dominance has been disproved" BS every time someone hits one of their keywords like leader, or going through door first, especially when it has little or nothing whatsoever to do with the persons post they are replying to.

I, for one, am tired of seeing dogs brought to the shelter I volunteer for, because someone has used their idea of "dominance" and have turned their dog into a defensive, frustrated, dangerous dog. So, I will likely keep popping up with reminding people that the wolf study that is STILL linked to many people's concept of the dominance theory is flawed.

Dominance exists in -most- relationships between individuals to some degree and in some fashion. I am an employer, I am dominant in the relationship between me and my employees. If I am a parent I am dominant in the relationship with my kids. A cop is dominant in his relationship with me. I am dominant in the relationship with my dog. It has nothing to do with folks like Mech or Schenkel, Rabb, Fox, or Zimen or their limited studies on wolves or what they have or haven't proved or disproved.

I see my relationship with my dog more as a parent, and I believe it's the closest analogy I have heard described. I don't think many would argue against the statement that a parent is dominant in the parent child relationship. This is exactly what Mech who "disproved" prior "dominance theory" from previous captive wolf studies expressly stated, that the dominant wolves in the pack are the breeding parents, not that dominance doesn't exist, just that it isn't gained by force and fought over and contested constantly as previously described by folks like Schenkel..

I guess I just don't prefer the use of the word "dominance" in any of these situations, employer, parent, etc, as it has, to me, a negative connotation. Yes, an employer, and a parent have authority, but I choose not to use the word dominance. I am a teacher. I have, if I do say so myself, few discipline problems, as I pride myself of clear rules and expectations, as well as clear consequences. I am fair, and reasonable, but, yes, I am the authority in my class.
I have seen teachers who were "dominant" in their classrooms, and, again, in my own opinion, that connotates putting someone down, talking down to students, flaunting your "power". I prefer to be fair and get respect because I am fair and set clear guidelines and boundaries.


Or in the words Dr. Mech who is touted as being the man who disproved "dominance theory" himself.. "Calling a wolf an alpha is usually no more appropriate than referring to a human parent or a doe deer as an alpha. Any parent is dominant to its young offspring, so "alpha" adds no information."

So although old studies had been corrected, that in no way means dominance doesn't exists in wolf packs, only that it is established in a different manner in a natural wolf pack, and not gained by force and fought over as previously believed. A quite common misunderstanding of the science, and quite unfortunately IMO parroted out on forums with little real understanding.

Very good point, and I agree, especially with the part about not being gained by force. Again, that's why I don't like to use the word dominance, because it, to many people, has a physical component.

What was really disproved is that unrelated wolves brought together in captivity do not form packs like a natural parental packs in the wild..

That is about all that has been disproved from what I can see.. And that the dominant wolves in a natural pack are still dominant, but they are simply dominant because they are the parents and ALL parents are naturally dominant in the parent offspring relationship. NOT that dominance doesn't exist, quite the contrary. It does exist, simply a new dominance theory of the wolf pack replaced the old one.

But that has limited applicability to dogs, as dogs are not wolves and don't behave like mature wolves.

Modern science has also described dogs as perpetual juvenile wolves behaviorally, that dogs behavior is very much like a juvenile wolf that never matures. Exactly the same as the behavioral differences between many domesticated animals and their wild counterparts and most recently and clearly shown in the 50 years of foxes bred for friendliness to humans in Russia.. who have pretty much all the exact same differences between them and wild foxes as dogs have between them and wolves both behaviorally and visually..

Domestication and breeding for tameness it seems is actually precisely selecting for juvenile traits. Creating permanent juveniles. Or simply stated we are creating child versions of the wild animal that never grow up and we assume their parental role, the dominant role, and that IS domestication..

Sigh... the whole inaccurate "this has been disproven" junk is becoming as much of a pet peeve as anything to do with those keywords seems to be for the people who spout it.
My responses in bold.
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top