Right, so I'm reading "The Book of Deadly Animals" by Gordon Grice. First few pages, pure awesome. And theennnn, it came to the section on dogs.
..........such total bullshit. He starts off by saying
"the dog is the most dangerous large animal except for the human being." How does he rationalize this, you might ask? Well, he goes on to say that tons of people are bitten by dogs every year, while relatively few people are bitten by animals like tigers. Therefore, dogs are more dangerous.
Currently in Canada, there are about 5.9 million dogs. Globally, there are around 4,000 wild tigers. So yeah, more people will be bitten by dogs then tigers. However, I think any sane person would rather be locked in a room with a dog, even a feral one, then a tiger. Seriously, dude? Dogs are more dangerous then tigers?
Yeah, nice try.
So, Gordon, why exactly are dogs so dangerous?
"The dog, despite the remarkable diversity of its body types, is simply a kind of wolf. Wolf packs are structured partly according to a dominance hierarchy, with stronger, more intimidating animals taking roles of privilege and leadership."A swing and a miss.
Dogs are not simple "a kind of wolf". Dogs have been shaped over thousands of years into what they are now: creatures dependent on humans. In Budapest, an experiment took place to prove this. Scientists first hand reared dogs, to study their development and their interactions with humans. After this, thirteen wolves were taken from a conservation park, and raised in the same way. They were treated the same way as the dogs, and received the same training. Despite this, it was clear that even highly socialized wolves showed some major differences.
The dogs followed the scientists around their houses, wanting to be a part of their daily activities. If scolded, the dogs would stand down, wanting to please their owners.
The wolves were different. They were very independent, and lived their own lives rather then trailing after the scientists. The wolves didn't show much response to scolding, either. They would continue to shred books and pillows regardless of how their human companions reacted. Eventually, they had to be taken out of the houses and put back in the reserve.
Dogs have been molded through the years to read human emotions and gestures, and respond accordingly. An experiment was done to test this, with the hand reared dogs and wolves. Two cups were places before them, one concealing food and the other one empty. The wolves had no clue which contained the treat, and, once realized, would choose one at random. They didn't seem to care that the human standing in front of them was pointing at the food cup....this gesture was totally meaningless to them.
The dogs, on the other hand, passed this test with flying colours. Not only were they able to understand pointing, they could even follow the direction of the human's gaze to pick out the right cup. This is nature, not nurture. Even the dog puppies they brought in were able to pass this test.
What's more, it's been proven that dogs read facial expressions in the same way that we do. Human expressions are unsymmetrical, so we have a wired in tenancy to look at the left side of faces. This behavior is unique to both us and dogs.
Wolves are simply unable to decipher facial expressions in the same way that dogs are.
That's why this line pissed me off so much:
"It is the eyes that provoke them; a direct gaze is a claim of social superiority, and the dog may challenge that claim from the weakest member of a human pack."It's just so ignorant! It's a proven facts that dogs will
seek out eye contact, to better read a human's mood.
And all this pack business is crap. Feral dogs will NOT form packs. In Romania, homeless dogs have unwittingly debunked that myth. Feral dogs are EVERYWHERE, but none of them show the same complex social structure and hierarchy as a wolf pack.
"Their associations with one another are brief and casual: a couple of dogs may hang out together temporarily and then part company. Dogs are often drawn together by a scarce resource like a food source or estrous female but once this magnet is gone, they go their separate ways." - Jean DonaldsonThe majority of the time, a dog biting a human is not a result of "dominance". A well socialized and trained dog will not bite. A fearful, abused dog, however, will bite.
"Sometimes dogs well past puppyhood try to rise socially by hurting children....I have known badly trained puppies to constantly rough up the youngest child in a house. The puppy is trying to improve his rank by establishing his dominance over a child"Oh dear GAWD, so much bullshit. A badly trained puppy will bite
because it's badly trained. And it might target children because kids love to run around and screw with stuff. They see a puppy and instantly run to pick it up. If that puppy has been brought up to think biting is acceptable, it will bite to say "HOLY SHIT CHILD, PUT ME DOWN." The only unprovoked bite a puppy would give would be a play bite. A close friend of mine has a Newfoundland dog, who she never bothered to train. When he was a pup, he would constantly be jumping up on people and trying to nibble them. It was cute when he was little, so they didn't stop him, but as he became a larger and bigger pup the biting became serious.
So, there we have it. Badly trained pup biting children. Why? Not to establish dominance, but to play. His bites were never
meant to hurt, he simply didn't know his own strength. He was never taught that biting could hurt people.
GORDAN GRICE, DO YOUR RESEARCH. You are teaching people, through your book, that dogs need to be dominated. They need to be "put in their place", and made to feel inferior. Otherwise, they'll make you their bitch.
......nope. Dogs have been molded through artificial selection to act exactly how we intend them to: as our loyal companions. As I said before, an abused dog may show aggressive tenancies, but so would an abused child. It is not okay to "dominate" your dog. Train them, yes, but treat them more like friends. That's exactly what I did with my massive Leonberger, Bailey, and she has turned out to be the sweetest creature on Earth. She brings "gentle giant" to a whole new level. It's actually pretty funny.....she will just sit there quietly as small children jump on her and pull her ears, and the only action she'll take is to give me and my family imploring "HELP ME" looks.
So, in conclusion, Gordon Grice is an idiot.
Sorry, bro.
If you're interested, here are some interesting articles on the differences between dogs and wolves:
www.everythingwolf.com/news/re…
www.jeandonaldson.com/jeans-bl…
scienceblogs.com/thoughtfulani…