Owning Pets

[Fraggle Rocker]

In the context of this thread... that sounds creepy at the very least... much less "ethical"... i.e... one animal "domesticating" another animal!!!

Bear in mind that the two most common species of companion animals, dogs and cats, domesticated themselves.

Wolves have a psychology very similar to ours, pack-social hunters, but like their close cousins the coyotes and jackals they also have a strong scavenging instinct. About fifteen thousand years ago in central China, a few of the more gregarious, adventurous, opportunistic individuals sidled into our camp after noticing our habit of leaving perfectly good food lying on the ground. The ones who found this to be a sweet deal and could resist the temptation to eat the babies were warily welcomed because garbage was becoming a bit of a problem. Their hunting skills also turned out to be complementary to ours (faster running and more sensitive noses vs. more elaborate planning and those amazing pointy sticks), and together we were able to bring home much more meat than either species could do separately. Their night vision kept the camp safe, they were great bed-mates in cold weather, and our kids entertained each other to the great relief of the adults. Talk about symbiosis!

All dogs are descended from that one pack of wolves. They have become a distinct subspecies, Canis lupus familiaris, distinguished by smaller brains (adaptation to a less carnivorous diet), teeth that are not quite as well suited for tearing flesh, and an immensely more gregarious nature that even welcomes pack-mates of other species. Large dogs occasionally interbreed with wolves, and even with coyotes, a different species.

Cats, on the other hand, are not very much like us. They're solitary hunters, not social by instinct. About seven thousand years ago when advances in agricultural technology in Egypt gave rise to granaries, the local cats couldn't help noticing the rodents who were munching on that bounty of grain. They followed them in and for purely selfish motives began providing a valuable service to us. People began attracting cats to their towns, leaving out water and extra food, letting them sleep indoors, and helping take care of their lovable little babies. To this day cats are more independent than dogs, and are more likely to be earning their keep by hunting rodents.

This is another case of symbiosis. Cats have not been selectively bred for as long as dogs so they have not become a distinct subspecies of Felis sylvestris libicus. All domestic cats are descended from the Egyptian population, although there are other subspecies of Felis sylvestris on other continents (even in Scotland), and domestic cats interbreed with them, muddying up the gene pool.

Has anyone used the word symbiosis yet?

I just did, but it was inspired by your post so you get the credit.

When I see certain dog breeds I do want to take a stick to the breeders . . . .

Yes, we breed Lhasa Apsos (one of the very oldest breeds and one that was, apparently, specifically bred to clean up garbage, obviously not for hunting), but it's the AKC that we want to take the stick to. You can thank them for hip dysplasia, pancreas failure, and large American breeds with a life expectancy of seven years. The AKC rewards breeding for conformation to show standards rather than health and temperament, and they will cheerfully register a litter that is the result of ten generations of inbreeding. We gave up on the AKC years ago and we've become legendary for our happy, healthy dogs who don't always look exactly like the ones in the picture books.

. . . . but once the poor things are in the world getting one from a shelter seems ethical to me. Buying one does not however.

Depends on what you want. The breeds have certain traits and when you get a mixed breed you don't know which of those traits you're getting. Lhasa Apsos, for example, are aloof and inactive but have an unerring ability to tell you whether you should allow the person at the door to come in. Spaniels aren't happy unless they're in a group of twenty. Border collies will herd your children into a corner of the yard. A retriever will always stand in front of you handing you a ball to throw. Maltese will run you ragged teaching them new tricks. A French bulldog will insist on going everywhere with you but not doing anything once he gets there. Our Anatolian was such a faithful livestock guardian that the deer jumped into our yard at night for protection from the bears and cougars.

You mix these instincts up in a mongrel and you have no idea how that dog will behave when he grows up.

House plants, on the other hand, should all be liberated immediately.

An illustrative example. Just how far would you have to travel to find a natural environment in which it would thrive?

 

[Syzygys]

Bear in mind that the two most common species of companion animals, dogs and cats, domesticated themselves.

...and we know this from the historical records as it was written down by Kipling titled The cat, who walked by himself...

 

[cluelusshusbund]

Originally Posted by cluelusshusbund
In the context of this thread... that sounds creepy at the very least... much less "ethical"... i.e... one animal "domesticating" another animal!!!

Bear in mind that the two most common species of companion animals, dogs and cats, domesticated themselves.

"Cats have not been selectively bred for as long as dogs"

Thanks... that helped me to beter focus my actual concern which is:::

It sounds creepy at the very least... much less "ethical"... i.e... one animal "selectively-breedin" another animal.!!!

I woudnt relesh the prospect of humans bein selectively-bred to suit the needs of a much advanced entity... so i queston the morality of humans selectively breedin other animals for our own purposes.!!!

 

[(Q)]

can my dog get up and walk out of the house? yes, but she wouldn't because she loves and respects me.

You actually expect anyone to believe that nonsense?

 

[(Q)]

Do you eat meat? It would seem a bit inconsistent to question keeping animals as pets but consider eating them Ok.

Sorry, but that's a completely different topic and has no bearing on this one.

I own a dog (german shepherd) and two cats. The reason I own the cats is that my wife likes them. I own the dog mainly for the kids, and as a watchdog. I think it's good for children to have a dog. It teaches them some responsibility and teaches them empathy for other living things. In this era of computers, video games, and TV; a pet also helps keep children in touch with physical reality and makes them aware that animals aren't just characters in stories.
Putting aside the bolded portion of your statement, without pets I think most people would lose all touch with nature and care even less about the environment than they do now. Pets are like nature's ambassadors to humanity. Consider that it is mainly cute animals (like Pandas) that drive many people's interest in such things. Get rid of pets, and soon we'll get rid of nature all together. Pave over the whole planet except for land used to produce food. Nothing wild left whatsoever.

Come now, you're being utterly ridiculous.

 

[(Q)]

??? Are you saying I should give the cats money instead of food, vet care, and a roof over their head?

That's essentially what slavery offered.

 

[Norsefire]

For all of you saying pets wouldn't survive on their own, that's true, but that's our fault; we are the ones that domesticated them and made them dependent on us.

Canines and felines were initially hunters, just like some of them still are.

 

[Orleander]

...Why don't you consider companionship as "earning their keep"??? ....

because it has never been my experience. I can't even wrap my mind around the idea of buying an animal just so I'm not lonely.

 

[(Q)]

It is ethical to care for a pet animal. In fact, you could well be doing it a service by giving it a home rather than consigning it to ekeing out an existence, potentially causing harm to other animals.

Give homes to lions and tigers then, too, using the same logic.

I did not trap the cat, but left food for it...

My point exactly.

The cat is not trapped. She is free to go outside and roam around. Yet she chooses to come back. She is happy living with us.

She is getting food, that's about it for the cats interest.

No. Many animal activists rescue animals intended for slaughter and keep them as pets (or give them to other people as pets). It is a kindness.

It may be kindness now, but it wasn't kindness that placed the pet in that predicament in the first place, and it is that which I refer.

You don't like them yourself?

I love animals, that's why I don't "own" them.

 

[(Q)]

Since there's never a food shortage our primary motivation is love

No, its a food thing, not a love thing, Fraggle.

Many people let their cats roam freely (although city ordinances are cracking down on that) and if your cat doesn't come home the only reason is that something bigger ate him.

Or, he found another source of food. In fact, most pets that roam find various sources of food and visit those sources regularily. It's doubtful they have the intellectual capacity to recognize once source over another as being their "masters"

If you treat them well they'll be perfectly delighted to stay with you.

You mean as long as there is food.

Why don't you consider companionship as "earning their keep"??? It's been well documented that dogs keep us healthy by relieving stress, encouraging us to play more, and providing absolutely unconditional love that's hard to get anywhere else. Of course other species perform these tasks too, but dogs have been doing it for at least twice as long and they're better at it.

And, how do you think that occurred over the centuries? Selected breeding, perhaps?

Look at the earth's cesspools in which dog ownership is not common or outright forbidden: Inner cities and the backwoods of fundamentalist Islam. People in both places have lost their grip on civilization and have regressed to the tribal era.

That's due to Islam, not dog ownership, get a grip.

How could they possibly thrive on their own in an ecosystem that has been almost completely rebuilt to our specifications and no longer resembles the one their ancestors evolved to fit?

In other words, we have created a problem and are so far into it there's no turning back?

These species have been bred in captivity for thousands of generations, and they no longer have the temperament to rough it. You occasionally see feral populations of cats or dogs, and they're usually hanging around the fringes of civilization scavenging (and gratefully accepting handouts), not reverting to the hunting life of their ancestors.

Then, lets' begin to reverse that cycle and allow future generations of pets to join back into nature, where they belong, and are no longer kept as pieces of furniture to amuse us.

Right or wrong, what's done is done and we now have species of companion animals who like being companion animals.

So, we throw up our hands and forget about it?

 

[(Q)]

What do people do with their own offspring? Do they own them? Is it ethical to let your children go at any time if it is their free will and desire to separate themselves from you? Are children your slaves?

Let's offer something equally ridiculous, do people give birth to cats and dogs?

Domesticated animals that are kept as pets (dogs, cats, etc.) are very much like children in that respect. Children and animals can be both pleasurable and entertaining. And alot of work as well.

But, guess what, they're aren't children.

 

[(Q)]

We don't own pets, we adopt them. This thread is ridiculous.

No, you go out and buy them and pay with money, so it would appear that your response is ridiculous.

 

[Norsefire]

I must say I agree with Q.

 

[S.A.M.]

No, you go out and buy them and pay with money, so it would appear that your response is ridiculous.

Uh no, I [or more accurately, usually my sister, who is more prone to attacks of kindheartedness] pick them up off the street as orphans. A couple we've had dropped into our yard by people who know we'll take care of very sick animals [we get freebies at the vet too].

So I'd say your imagination is severely limited.

I must say I agree with Q.

What a surprise!

 

[(Q)]

I must say I agree with Q.

Make sure it is the same thing we agree upon and not something different. Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating any bans or abolishments on pet ownership, but instead am just bringing to light this particular worldwide phenomenon that many are quite clearly disillusioned with.

If we look at animal shelters, we understand there are a great number of irresponsible pet owners and we understand pets do leave their homes and don't return, for whatever reason. Often, pets are simply discarded or left to die.

If we look at the multi-billion dollar pet industry and the animals that die to feed our nations pets and the waste of this food on pets when so many children starve to death each day.

There are a great number of problems with owning pets, and those problems should probably be dealt with by the pet owners themselves. Instead, I seem to only be reading in the weak and lame justificationa of owning them.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

...and we know this [that dogs and cats are self-domesticated] from the historical records as it was written down by Kipling titled The cat, who walked by himself.

We know this about dogs because prior to the Neolithic Era humans didn't have the technology and ability to domesticate predatory species. There is some evidence of Mesolithic tribes possibly experimenting with the domestication of herbivores--pastoral nomadism. But the paradigm shift that defined the Neolithic was the Agricultural Revolution: the cultivation of plants and the domestication of animals, which made the building of permanent settlements both possible and necessary. This began around 9000BCE, several millennia after the self-domestication of wolves.

I'll leave the detailed history of cats to a cat person.

It sounds creepy at the very least... much less "ethical"... i.e... one animal "selectively-breeding" another animal!!! I wouldn't relish the prospect of humans being selectively-bred to suit the needs of a much advanced entity... so I question the morality of humans selectively breeding other animals for our own purposes!!!

Considering that we have selectively bred ourselves, your argument is a little weak. DNA analysis allows us to avoid having children with dire conditions. And before we knew about genetics we simply chose mates with the characteristics we wanted to propagate in the tribe.

You actually expect anyone to believe that nonsense? [that pets stay with us because they like us and we make them comfortable and happy]

Q, why do you so readily veer off into asshole behavior when everyone around you is being polite and non-confrontational? Too much caffeine? Maybe you don't have a pet to trigger some soothing endorphins? Why do you have to call something "nonsense" that has already been elaborated in this very thread? It makes you sound like cranky old Baron Max, with your own thread on the Moderators' board.

If you disagree with something, please be a proper scientist and say why, so the discussion can move forward. And dial back the hyperbolic and inflammatory language. This is a place of science so we're free to talk that way about religion, but not much of anything else.

Dogs are a pack-social species. Their instinct is to stay with their pack, not to go off on their own for very long. If you earn the status of alpha of the pack by bringing home a dead pig, several dead chickens and a big chunk of a dead cow every month for everyone to share, you've gone a long way toward earning their loyalty. If you also treat them with affection and return their loyalty, you've got it made. Dogs are quite capable of love and if they receive it they'll return it. That is their big attraction, in an era when the demand for livestock protection, game retrieval and detritus removal by alimentation has dropped off dramatically.

For all of you saying pets wouldn't survive on their own, that's true, but that's our fault; we are the ones that domesticated them and made them dependent on us.

But in addition, we've changed the world. There isn't as much room for hunters as there used to be. Wolves were the most successful predators in history and populated every continent except Australia and Antarctica, but now they're extinct in many places.

The rain forest is vanishing and captive breeding is the salvation of many species of birds. There are probably more hyacinthine macaws (the huge long-tailed purple parrot that is the poster child for the endangered species movement) in North American living rooms than in South American jungles. The same is undoubtedly true of the European polecat in its increasingly urbanized homeland--the animal better known as the ferret.

because it has never been my experience. I can't even wrap my mind around the idea of buying an animal just so I'm not lonely.

That's not what "companionship" means--at least not all of it. You have a qualitatively different relationship with a dog than you have with a human. They are extremely empathetic and know exactly how you feel when you're able to hide it from your family and friends--and even from yourself. (Some of that may be due to pheromones of course; they have a million times as many receptors as we do.) They love you even when you don't love yourself, and they are far more forgiving than most people can be. You can't lie to a dog and they don't lie to you. They remind you to laugh more, cry more and play more, and give you the simplicity and clarity to figure out what things are really important. All they ask in return is love, food, kindness, and not to be left all alone very often (except Lhasa Apsos, which are dogs for cat lovers). Such a bargain.

 

[(Q)]

So I'd say your imagination is severely limited.

Really? Explain to me again where exactly those pets came from? They were discarded, right, by "pet owners"? Tell me again, then, of the responsibility of all those pets who were discarded and then explain to me what my imagination has to do with that?

 

[S.A.M.]

She is getting food, that's about it for the cats interest.

How do you know this? Have you had a cat who only came to you for food? I have a cat who shows up on the hour to have her head scratched, I believe she thinks she is a dog, since she also patrols the door and behaves in general, very un-cat like.

I don't think you know anything at all about pets, so I fail to see why you are making these assertions out of ignorance?

Why don't you get a stray kitten and see how much you "own" her?

Really? Explain to me again where exactly those pets came from? They were discarded, right, by "pet owners"? Tell me again, then, of the responsibility of all those pets who were discarded and then explain to me what my imagination has to do with that?

They are strays, not discarded pets. There are lots of stray cats and dogs in the world, not every animal is living on the street because of some person. Why I myself have four pet cats and three strays who only visit occasionally. I also look after a stray dog, who only visits when she is ill, she sleeps in our balcony until she is well again, then leaves.

 

[Orleander]

....That's not what "companionship" means--at least not all of it. You have a qualitatively different relationship with a dog than you have with a human. They are extremely empathetic and know exactly how you feel when you're able to hide it from your family and friends--and even from yourself. (Some of that may be due to pheromones of course; they have a million times as many receptors as we do.) They love you even when you don't love yourself, and they are far more forgiving than most people can be. You can't lie to a dog and they don't lie to you. They remind you to laugh more, cry more and play more, and give you the simplicity and clarity to figure out what things are really important. All they ask in return is love, food, kindness, and not to be left all alone very often (except Lhasa Apsos, which are dogs for cat lovers). Such a bargain.

Yes, I do have a qualitatively different relation ship with a pet vs a human. I can sell a pet. I can sell its offspring. I can have it put to sleep. I can have it sterilized. I can kick it out of my house.
How does an animal remind you to laugh, cry and play? Of course they don't lie to you. They don't talk!
Why do people humanize animals?

 

[(Q)]

Q, why do you so readily veer off into asshole behavior when everyone around you is being polite and non-confrontational?

Stuff it. You and everyone else on this forum have done the same things, so you can shove your hypocrisy where the sun don't shine.

Maybe you don't have a pet to trigger some soothing endorphins?

And, maybe I respect animals to the point of not owning them, something you clearly fail to acknowledge.

This is a place of science

No, it isn't, and has not been for a long time. You can stuff that bs too.

Dogs are a pack-social species. Their instinct is to stay with their pack, not to go off on their own for very long.

Then clearly, we shouldn't own them and single them out of their packs.

You have a qualitatively different relationship with a dog than you have with a human.

Yes, one is slavery and the other is pet ownership.

They are extremely empathetic and know exactly how you feel when you're able to hide it from your family and friends--and even from yourself. (Some of that may be due to pheromones of course; they have a million times as many receptors as we do.) They love you even when you don't love yourself, and they are far more forgiving than most people can be. You can't lie to a dog and they don't lie to you. They remind you to laugh more, cry more and play more, and give you the simplicity and clarity to figure out what things are really important. All they ask in return is love, food, kindness, and not to be left all alone very often (except Lhasa Apsos, which are dogs for cat lovers). Such a bargain.

And, that's supposed to be science?