Why dogs like to roll in shit and carcasses?

[valich]

Hypotheses: not theories. I rely more on observations and facts:

"When a wolf encounters a novel odor, it first sniffs and then rolls in it, getting the scent on its body, especially around the face and neck. Upon its return, the pack greets it and during the greeting investigates the scent thoroughly. At Wolf Park, we've observed several instances where one or more pack members has then followed the scent directly back to its origin."

These observations do not support the "pack smell" hypothesis.

Brown Bears have also been observed scent-rolling: rolling in pepper spray residue. Brown Bears are not pack animals, nor do they hunt in stealth, but Polar Bears do hunt seals in stealth. So I wonder if Polar Bears scent roll.

 

[invert_nexus]

Hypotheses: not theories.

Correction noted.
Well done.

These observations do not support the "pack smell" hypothesis.

And what about rolling in shit?
Rolling in perfume?
Rolling in any strong smell they come across?
Which hypotheses do these behaviors support?
Surely the wolf didn't roll in perfume to tell its wolfy buddies where the best perfume stores are.

Ever consider that these behaviors are intermingled?

Consider.
The wolf that finds a carcass to roll in and brings that smell back to the pack and is greeted in the manner which you describe is a wolf that has been away from the pack at the time of the rolling.
But, if the wolf had been with the pack, then all the wolves would have rolled in it.

Different motivations for the same behavior.
Depending on context.

 

[valich]

I stated: "I think we need to differentiate scent rolling in scat and scent rolling in carcasses."

You asked: "Why?"

I answered.

 

[invert_nexus]

And I offered my response to your answer.
I think your reasoning is flawed.
If only the one type of behavior were observed, then that would be one thing; however, it's not.

 

[Alva]

Heh, I read through this entire thread, thinking it'd answer my question.

 

[valich]

And what about rolling in shit?
Rolling in perfume?
Rolling in any strong smell they come across?
Which hypotheses do these behaviors support?
Surely the wolf didn't roll in perfume to tell its wolfy buddies where the best perfume stores are.

Ever consider that these behaviors are intermingled?

Consider.
The wolf that finds a carcass to roll in and brings that smell back to the pack and is greeted in the manner which you describe is a wolf that has been away from the pack at the time of the rolling. But, if the wolf had been with the pack, then all the wolves would have rolled in it.

Different motivations for the same behavior.
Depending on context.

You can't say that my reasoning is flawed when I haven't even developed a hypothesis. As you should now know, I have abandoned my original commonly held "camo theory" and am pursuing further investigations into the facts. What I requoted is not what "I" described: these are the observations made at the Wolf Park in Indiana that we now have to take into account. These are the best direct observations that I have yet to come across. The "trophy" hypothesis would support these observations but it is too superficial of an explanation: needs more depth of insight. It is definitely a shared primitive allomemitic pack behavior, but why? To what end? Bears do it too, but they are not pack animals. This supports the insight that it is a shared primitive behavior, meaning that is inherited from ancestral behavior. Bears diverged from the same lineage as Canidae, so it could be a vestgial behavior of an original pack behavior. Behavioral traits are just as vestigial as morphology traits.

We do not know that "if the wolf had been with the pack, then all the wolves would have rolled in it." This is another unknown that needs factual support, right? I've owned more than one dogs and they did not have the same tendency to roll in the same scat. I don't know. It's still an open field of speculation.

 

[valich]

Heh, I read through this entire thread, thinking it'd answer my question.

I don't know how long you have been on Sciforum, but if you've been on for any length of time you should know that some forums can go on for a very long time due to the diversity of views and input. Have you learned or discovered anything? Life is all about learning: lifelong learning. And the only thing ever constant is change.

 

[invert_nexus]

You can't say that my reasoning is flawed when I haven't even developed a hypothesis.

Your reasoning is flawed for the reasons I've already given up above.
Because there is more involved than the communication hypothesis.
There are other observations that have been posted in this very thread where wolves will roll in any strong-smelling substance.
This does not jibe with the idea that the wolf is bringing home the scent of meat to its pack brothers and sisters.
Also, the rolling in shit does not fit with this.

As I said, I believe that there is a mixture of things going on here.
The communication hypothesis would only inspire behavior when a wolf is away from the pack. When it is in a sort of solitary mode.
When it is with the pack, in social mode, it exhibits the same behavior (rolling in meat) but for a completely different... effect.

Thus, I see no reason to separate the rolling in shit from rolling in carcasses.
Not in a general sense, anyway.

The observations do not merit such a stark categorization.

We do not know that "if the wolf had been with the pack, then all the wolves would have rolled in it." This is another unknown that needs factual support, right?

According to several posts, this is one of the leading hypotheses held by the experts. I suppose to be strictly scientific here, we need observations to back it up, but we're not wildlife researchers here.
None of the 'research' you're doing is really scientific. It's all just allegorical and anecdotal.
You could go out and spend a few seasons with the wolf pack if you care to really find out.
Game?

 

[valich]

I totally agree with you. And this is the basis for my persisent inquiries. The transmitting of "communication hypothesis" does not take into account all the observations that have been posted. I also agree that there is a "mixture of things going on here." This is why I suggested that, "maybe we should look at rolling in scat and rolling in carcasses as a separate form of behavior."

I do not understand what you mean by stating: "The communication hypothesis would only inspire behavior when a wolf is away from the pack. When it is in a sort of solitary mode." You can not communicate solitarily if there is no one around to communicate with?

"When it is with the pack, in social mode, it exhibits the same behavior (rolling in meat) but for a completely different... effect."

Again, we have no evidence or observations that all members of a pack will scent-roll in the same scat or carcass. Yes, I am a "wildlife researcher." This is my vocation and major and this is what I am doing right now. Unfortunately I do not have the support, financial backing, or exclusive unreserved interest to focus solely on this, but it is an area of interest related to my current research studies. What I am doing here is not "allegorical," but yes I am relying on observations, as I can do no better at this point in time, although I also have observed wolves in the wild. I've been to Alaska three times so far, but I have no personal experience about wolf behavior regarding this subject. I have spent months camping out in the bush amongst wolves but have not observed this behavior. In lieu of this I am taking into account what is being posted on this thread. Perhaps in the future I will research it more in the wild. I just do not have the time right now to concentrate on this as a priority, but it does relate to my priority area of research.

 

[invert_nexus]

This is why I suggested that, "maybe we should look at rolling in scat and rolling in carcasses as a separate form of behavior."

Yes. But this isn't necessarily the best way to look at it.
Rather, they should be looked at separately in certain instances and together in others.
The key is in knowing which is which, eh?

I do not understand what you mean by stating: "The communication hypothesis would only inspire behavior when a wolf is away from the pack. When it is in a sort of solitary mode." You can not communicate solitarily if there is no one around to communicate with?

It is only when a wolf is solitary that it needs to communicate with such explicit information. When the wolf is with the pack, the pack can see (and smell) for itself.

It takes the scent of the carcass back to the pack to communicate.

Again, we have no evidence or observations that all members of a pack will scent-roll in the same scat or carcass.

Well. Let me ask you this. How could it be a leading theory if there weren't evidence or observations that would back it up?

Let me ask you something else. Do you really think that only a couple of wolves in a pack would roll in a nice, juicy, rotten carcass? Why? Why not the whole gang?
You know damn well that they'll all get in the act. They'll all want their own piece of the pie.

What I am doing here is not "allegorical,"

Sure it is. You're just googling for stuff. That's hardly scientific.
Take LindyLou for example.
Your 'common knowledge'.

Perhaps in the future I will research it more in the wild.

Well, get back to us in the future then.

 

[Alva]

Have you learned or discovered anything?

Not yet...

But I feel it's getting there, for you at least.

 

[valich]

Invert: the previous leading upheld theory by all behavioral biologists was that scent-rolling was to hide their scent for the hunt. Only relatively recently has this theory been debunked. There is no leading theory now.

I know no of observations of the entire pack rolling in a carcass.

We do know that this is a way of bringing information back to the pack. If it is the scent of a carcass, then I would think that it is a learned behavior, i.e., a shared recently-derived trait. The other members of the pack recognize the scent of the carcass and follow it back to the kill to stuff their bellies. This makes a lot of sense, but rolling in scat does not. Again, why do bears scent roll? they are not pack animals. Therefore, I think we can assume that it is a shared primitive behavior passed on down from Canidae/Miacid pack behavior and that is instinctive.

 

[valich]

Abstract: This article discusses training canines for conservation projects. Dogs are trained to find scat of big carnivorous animals, such as grizzly bears. By following scat trails, researchers can trace bears' itinerant habits, see what they eat, and discover the density of populations. Using dogs is much cheaper than other means. 60% of the dogs chosen to train for this work end up failing. It is tough work and requires the right disposition."
Source: Etter, Lauren. 2006. "Scratch 'n' Sniff: Special Canine Unit Knows to Nose Scat." Wall Street Journal - Eastern Edition; 9/23/2006, Vol. 248 Issue 71, pA1-A8, 2p.

 

[invert_nexus]

Only relatively recently has this theory been debunked. There is no leading theory now.

Man. You go from one extreme to the other, don't you?
I don't think it's ever been 'debunked' as far as I know.
It's just that it's not as likely as some of the other theories. It still might play a part in the general gestalt though.

As to 'leading theory'. There are 'leading theories'. Plural.
That is, there are several theories which fit the evidence depending upon context and interpretation. Some theories fit the evidence better than other theories. But, each theory has its merits and also its detriments. Otherwise they wouldn't be touted as 'leading theories'.

Stop looking for the final answer.
There is none.
Only gentle gradations of context.

 

[valich]

Well yes, I definitely agree. But you're the one that inferred above (5 posts up): "How can this be a leading theory." I never suggested that it was? I stated: "we have no evidence or observations that all members of a pack will scent-roll in the same scat or carcass." And that was your comment?

I have a good friend in the NPS in Alaska who asked around abit amongst colleagues and just sent me this reply:

"The main reasons that I hear from people up here is that they roll in dead stuff (often herbivores) to cover up their own scent when hunting and to fool
members of other species."

 

[invert_nexus]

I never suggested that it was?

Well.
There goes your poor reading skills again.
Remember? The whole broken brain issue?

There have been various posts and links in this thread which do state that the communal pack smell theory is one of a few leading theories.

"The main reasons that I hear from people up here is that they roll in dead stuff (often herbivores) to cover up their own scent when hunting and to fool members of other species."

I'm curious if you're now able to interpret the anecdotal nature of this response? Hopefully your education is proceeding enough that soon you'll be able to converse in conversational english with the rest of us.
I won't hold my breath.

Wait.
Why am I talking to someone as disreputable as yourself?

Shame on me.
Mommy told me not to talk to lowlifes.

 

[valich]

Remember the whole "TWISTED "broken" brain issue." That is sooo dumb to post and you know it.

So here we have another expert who has lived in Alaska for over twenty-five years, hikes constantly in the bush, owns a pack of dogs, asks all her NPS friends that live in Alaska, and upholds the previous "leading theory": The main reason that they roll in dead stuff is to cover up their own scent for the hunt.

I am not the least interested in your anecdotal nature or anectodal responses, nor do I have time for them. If you don't have anything factual and contributory to add to the thread, then don't post.

 

[Idle Mind]

All around the mulberry bush...

 

[Dr Lou Natic]

Yeah, how annoying. Anyone would think we hadn't clearly established how incredibly unlikely the "cover their own scent" theory was pages ago...

 

[Roman]

I don't know if bears roll in carcasses, per se. They do lie on top of carcasses, but to keep bears and other scavengers off their kills.

Bears mark their territory by standing up near a tree and clawing and biting it. This way, other bears can compare to where they match up on the tree.

Remember the whole "TWISTED "broken" brain issue." That is sooo dumb to post and you know it.

So here we have another expert who has lived in Alaska for over twenty-five years, hikes constantly in the bush, owns a pack of dogs, asks all her NPS friends that live in Alaska, and upholds the previous "leading theory": The main reason that they roll in dead stuff is to cover up their own scent for the hunt.

I am not the least interested in your anecdotal nature or anectodal responses, nor do I have time for them. If you don't have anything factual and contributory to add to the thread, then don't post.

Those same people will be likely to tell you father bears eat their cubs.
Which is completely wrong.