Why dogs like to roll in shit and carcasses?

[invert_nexus]

If anything you owe me an apology for your condescending insults and belittlement that you always seem to resort to at the end of a forum just to put other people down.

If I insulted you only to put you down, then I'd owe you an apology.
If I insulted you for no reason, then I'd owe you an apology.
However, I insult you for good reason. Because you behave poorly and unethically.

You've still not apologized for being a dishonest little shit in this post:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=1179371#post1179371

I'm waiting.

Do you find enjoyment in this?

As a matter of fact, I do derive some enjoyment from insulting vile little worms such as yourself.
If you didn't behave as you did, then I wouldn't derive any satisfaction from pointing out your malbehavior and I would then no longer insult you.
Emotions are a goad, you know.

It serves no useful purpose, stifles learning, and demotivates those of us who are trying to pursue scientific facts and truth.

It does serve a purpose. It is a social cue for you to change your behavior to an appropriate one.
You are simply socially stunted. You never learn.
One can always hope though.

As to scientific fact and truth... there you go again.
You never learn.

Further, I never read your's or anyone elses lengthy, taken-out-of-context, dissected cut-and-post replies where you then just go on to do nothing usefull and just continue to further cut the person down line-by-line.

That just shows your learning deficit.
This is the best way to respond to a post, Valich.
In this way, we respond to specific points.
In this way the person we respond to knows exactly which point we are responding to with each point of our response.
It's called communication.
I'm sorry that you are unable to grasp it.

Of course, the reason you dislike it so much is because you often find yourself on the end of an insult and thus have misinterpreted this style of communication with insulting behavior.
This is your problem however. Perhaps someday you will learn better.
I doubt it though.

So what's the purpose in wasting your's and everybody else time by doing this?

You're not the only reader, Valich.
Just because you have poor reading skills doesn't mean that others share them.

I have laid out all the views that I could find. Some of these are even contrary to my own, which you of course you are then so eager to jump on just to insult me further.

I didn't insult you when I responded about how you posted views different than your own. I merely made the point that they are us unauthoritative as any other.

There's this little thing called intelligent discussion, Valich.
You put forward a theory then you back it up with logic.
You are incapable of this.

If you look over the first 5 or 6 pages of this forum, I think that - against all forms of criticism and some very bazaar ridiculous postings - I have authoritatively - Yes! I work in the field and consult with some highly prestigious world reknowned experts in this field, so I say "authoritatively" - established the fact that this is a:

Shared derived or shared primitive allelomimetic pack behavior (primitive means that it was present in a common ancestor: allelomimetic means that it was originally learned from watching another do it). Those that acquired this allelomimetic pack behavior were more likely to survive, breed and reproduce, hence evolution of an ancestral trait - the continuation of the trait - through a beneficial adaptation or Darwinian natural selection.

You have authoritatively stated something that was never in any doubt.
Duh. Instincts are inherited from ancestors. Duh.

Roman's view on the middle of page six was the first post to add further substance, credence and better direction. He stated: "The caribou is out there, grazing. According to the camo theory, the entire world smells like rot, death, shit and despair. And by rolling in shit or dead animals, a dog can smell like everything else in a caribou's habitat....And the characterstic of all those places? It's not the overwhelming smell of rotting carcasses. It's the smell of shit....So I can see a dog rolling in cow dung to masquerade as a cow. Or at least blend into an environment already reeking of thousands of animals worth of shit....The only case I can see for scent camo is when hunting herd animals, which hang out around a lot of their own crap."

But he discredits the notion that Canidae (wolves) do the same thing by rolling in carcasses because this gives the smell of death: "Who's left? The one with the smart genes that figured out that the smell of carcass is associated with predators." Further, "rotting meat in the wild is rare." And so is the persistent smell of a carcass rare." I am unaware of a herd of elk or caribou staying away from a pile of bones

A viewpoint which has been stated again and again... but, you don't read people's posts...
As I said.
Your loss.

Do we know for a fact that wolves roll in carcasses? Or just shit?

Yes.

This forum is now much more productive and fruitful compared to the first 5 1/2 pages because we are now all looking at this behavior as a being a beneficial "pack behavior," possibly to benefit the predator's ability to catch prey.

You fucking idiot.
No one ever doubted this. This was never in question.
Christ you're fucking stupid.
See why I'm insulting you? Because you're being fucking dumb.

Although, the likelihood of this behavior benefiting the ability to capture prey is low. Social concerns are more likely.

1) A behavior to mask the Canidae's own scent from the prey.

2) Wolves do this type of behavior in order to bring information back to the pack. They roll in something so they can tell everybody what they have found. Scent-rolling is a peculiarity of canidae as a means of bringing information about the interesting scents back to conspecifics which may not have accompanied the animal to the oderiferous site. This hypothesis has merits in that it would give others in the pack information worth pursuing about a possible still existent food source, or the potential location of nearby prey.

3) Esthetics: To a wolf, a smell is a fascinating and even beautiful item; the equivalent to us of a beautiful painting or picture. The information it may contain is also important and ownership of that information confers importance upon the bearer. But the problem is that, unlike a material object such as a rotting, dead bird, they can't physically pick up a smell so how can they take it away? Simple! Roll in it. Wolves and dogs are often seen to roll specific areas of themselves in smelly stuff and it is possible that they are accentuating the scent highlights of parts of their bodies as part of their status body language - or, in this case, scent language."

4) As aa way of gaining statis in the pack to increase one's rank order by showing off and flaunting a greater variety of scents than the others. Thus proving to other pack-mates that he's the best at finding the prey?

2 and 3 seem most likely to me.
However, I also think that my argument for creation of a social pack smell has strong reasoning behind it.

1 and 4 are unlikely.

Can someone translate this last quote?

I think it's saying something about how stupid you are.

Thus, to a wolf, smells are a source of information for the predator-prey hunt, a source of important information about its own species, and a source of pleasure and fascination.

Thank you, Captain Obvious.

 

[Theoryofrelativity]

And I never once stated that there is no point in trying to find an answer.
That's ridiculous. Defeatist.

.

you're doing it again.

You have confirmed the answer can not be found yet you insist on looking for it?

speculation is all one can do when wondering 'why'. The experts have speculated and drawn conclusions based on that speculation. You consider that speculation flawed. That is your privilage. But who is speculating from a position of most knowledge of the subject...you or they?

I am happy to accept a novices speculation.....I am the first to accept 'experts' can be blinkered and 'set' in one way of thinking.

But I don't expect them to keep looking for what can never be found.

Do you really think dogs rolling in poo is of such monumental importance that we should invest resources into finding out why?

 

[invert_nexus]

I am unaware of a herd of elk or caribou staying away from a pile of bones

On the contrary, they eat them for calcium.

However, bones are not rotting carcasses, now are they?
Come on, do try to stay in the real world here.

 

[invert_nexus]

Tor,

You have confirmed the answer can not be found yet you insist on looking for it?

Done it again?
I said the answer can not be absolutely found. That there is no absolute justification of knowledge.
But, that is not to say that a theory that fits and works and has useful purpose cannot be derived from the information at hand.

As I said, look at what science has brought to this world. Look at all the technological masterpieces. The cures to diseases. The knowledge of the workings of the universe.
All this with no absolute justification of any of it.
It's all theory. And it's liable to change at any moment.

But, it works.
Thus, there is good reason to look for theoretical understanding of the world.

The experts have speculated and drawn conclusions based on that speculation.

The experts have also shown a wide variety of speculations.
And, in fact, most of these speculations follow the same lines of the amateurish speculations in this thread.
Imagine that.
Hmm.

But I don't expect them to keep looking for what can never be found.

That's why you shouldn't do like Valich and go off looking for truth and fact. Look instead for useful and valid theoretical explanations.
This is how science exists in a post-positivist world.

Do you really think dogs rolling in poo is of such monumental importance that we should invest resources into finding out why?

Yes.

 

[invert_nexus]

Valich,

By the way, a point for you to consider. I wouldn't spend much time on you if I didn't see something in you that was worth the effort. You do have a passion and a drive that I find respectable. Your goal of lifelong learning is something that I share.

But, you are on the wrong path. You seek truth when there is no truth. You are like a pilgrim seeking the holy shrine. The truth handed down from on high. Absolute and sancrosanct.
Until you dispel these ridiculous notions, you will never truly learn anything other than rote.
Rote memorization is for multiplication tables, not science.
Science is about critical thinking. Something which you have failed to provide again and again.

In this thread, for instance, you have not once provided a valid explanation to back up your camoflauge theory.
Not once.


Also, your dishonesty in that post back on the first page made my disgust of you rise in ways that it never has before. Always before you have been befuddled and exasperating. But, in that post you were deceitful and vile.

I see that your character is more foul than I had previously imagined.

Because of this, I had given up hope on you altogether and had limited my responses to you to merely calling you a fool in short and simple terms as there was no purpose to try to educate you.

I slowly slipped back into educator mode, and I suppose I'm giving you another chance.

I'm not sure you're worth it though. I believe that I will shortly give up on you altogether. Your failure to acknowledge your dishonesty confirms that your dishonesty is to the bone.

Of course, I shouldn't be surprised about your dishonesty. You've lied before and you'll lie again.
Always the expert, are you not? In whatever discussion is taking place?
Amazing, that.

 

[Roman]

An added consideration for rolling after bathing is dirt baths. Many animals roll in dirt and mud to remove parasites. Wet fur might be a stimulus to roll in order to dry the fur.

It could be a way to get rid of parasites.
I never thought of that.

An old cure for head lice was to cover your head in cow shit. The cow shit smothered the lice.

Perhaps it's a similar reason for dogs?

 

[Roman]

I am unaware of a herd of elk or caribou staying away from a pile of bones

A pile of bones is not a carcass.
Actually, if a Cervidae calf dies, the mother will often hang out around the calf and mourn the calf's death. I've heard of this happening in cows, too.

But animals still get skittish when the smell of death is in the air.

 

[spuriousmonkey]

But animals still get skittish when the smell of death is in the air.

Except Nazis.

 

[Roman]

Except Nazis.

Or Arabs.

 

[valich]

The canine habit of rubbing on strong smelling substances is common among domestic dogs as well as wolves. Although the object of such behavior is usually carrion or dung, any strong or novel odiferous substance will evoke the response in the wolf--even expensive perfume! (Mech, 1970)

Dogs scented in such a manner are immensely interesting to other dogs. To the chagrin and irritation of the owner, the behavior is often exhibited immediately after a bath. Puppies as young as 3 months of age may show the habit.

SOME COMMON THEORIES:

CAMOUFLAGE: The most common theory for the habit is olfactory camouflage. By rubbing in the strongest ambient smell, the predator might enjoy some slight advantage while stalking its prey. While this theory seems plausible enough, it has been rejected by some authorities based on the hunting techniques of the wolf.

OLFACTORY IDENTITY: A second theory suggests that the habit provides a kind of scent identity for the pack--with any strong odor being a sufficient stimulus to infectious and ecstatic rubbing--regardless of the source. Captive wolves have been observed rubbing in the same scented spot until the whole pack is scented with the odor (Klinghammer, personal communication). Fox (1972) has suggested that the dog may be motivated by an "an esthetic appreciation of odors" (1972:222) or such behavior may serve to enhance social recognition and contact (Fox, 1971).

SCENT-MARKING: Kleiman (1966) has suggested that the typical physical movement associated with the pattern is intended to impart the animal's scent to the object rubbed upon--not necessarily to receive odor from it.

ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION: Morris (1986) has rejected Kleiman's suggestion, arguing that if the canid's intention was to mask the odor with his own odor he would deposit an equally intense smell (feces or urine)--not simply rub on it. He has speculated that a possible purpose for the habit is to obtain and share information with other pack members about the surrounding environment via various scents the scouting wolf has rolled upon. Although pack members show great interest in the returning scout and appear to delight in the smells that he has collected, whether this exchange ever results in the initiation of a hunting sortie has not been determined. To my knowledge there has not been a controlled scientific investigation of this interesting phenomenon.

REFERENCES

Fox MW (1972). Understanding Your Dog. New York, NY: Coward, McCann & Geoghegan, Inc.

Kleiman D (1966). Scent marking in Canidae. Symp Zool Soc, 18:167-177(reported in Mech).

Mech, LD (1970). The Wolf: The Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species. Minneapolis, MN: Univ of Minnesota Press.

Morris D (1986). Dogwatching. New York: Crown Publishers, Inc.

Steve Lindsay
Canine Behavioral Services
Philadelphia, PA

I have had some experience working with wolves and wolf-dog hybrids. I observed members of a pack, upon discovering the existence of some interesting scent, proceed to rub parts of their body (especially the back and side) on the source. When this same member returns to the pack, it is usually greeted by the other members who seem very excited to discover that one of them has returned with some exotic scent! It is as though an explorer who has ventured out of the pack to some foreign land has returned with "pictures" to show!

I think this may be a form of communication, whereby pack mates share individual experiences, and if anyone is interested in the source, they can be brought there?

Lai Chien Hsun
Singapore Zoological Gardens
http://www.usask.ca/wcvm/ae/archives/mar01-15.98

"Scent rolling is probably a way for wolves to bring information back to the pack. 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.

This scent smearing ritual isn't limited to stinky odors. In her studies, Goodmann placed different odors in the wolf enclosures and found that wolves roll in sweet-smelling scents too. Besides rolling in ode-to-cat, elk, mouse, and hog, they also rolled in mint extract, Chanel No. 5, Halt! dog repellant, fish sandwich with tartar sauce, fly repellent, and Old Spice. So the scents aren't necessarily foul, nor are they ones that wolves necessarily like. Goodmann states, "some of the Wolf Park wolves object when handlers put fly repellent on their ear tips but these same wolves often scent roll readily in fly repellents manufactured to be sprayed onto horses, provided the scents are sprayed on the ground and left for the wolves to discover. While this foul form of fragrant communication may be fine for wolves, it's not so fun when it's Rover sharing the news. What can you do to discourage this odiferous behavior? According to Goodmann, it's a hard habit to break. Even if presented with an odor over and over, wolves continue to roll in it. The same goes for dogs. Since your chance of finding a mint patch next to every dead fish is smaller than slim, the solution lies in your keen vision and ability as a trainer. Keep your eyes open for things that excite your dogÕs nose and before Rover's rolling in ecstacy call him back to your side. While the training time for a good recall makes this solution sound tedious, the time saved on needless baths makes the effort easily worthwhile.

Pat Goodmann, research associate and curator of Wolf Park in Indiana.
http://www.nerdbook.com/sophia/article1.html?num=29

 

[valich]

A pile of bones is not a carcass.
Actually, if a Cervidae calf dies, the mother will often hang out around the calf and mourn the calf's death. I've heard of this happening in cows, too.

But animals still get skittish when the smell of death is in the air.

I was making reference to "a pile of bones" in reference to the fact that the smell of a dead carcass does not linger very long, nor do I think a dead carcass - the "smell of death" - is going to detour a herd of elk or caribou away from the site.

Do coyotes or foxes also roll in shit and carcasses? I imagine that they would, but I have never seen or heard of it. Does anyone have any experience of this? Thanks.

 

[invert_nexus]

It's amazing how you've gone out digging up this stuff and all it's saying is stuff we already said.

What does that say to you?
Hmm?

 

[valich]

Okay, I've got it. Both coyotes and foxes also scent roll. Most interesting, however, is that scent rolling has been observed in bears. A USGS biologist observed a brown bear rolling in the residue of pepper spray. http://www.securityprousa.com/usofpespnwe.html

Bears are not pack animals although they evolved from the same lineage as ancestral Canidae (wolves). This implies that scent rolling (rolling in shit and carcasses) is a "shared primitive" allelomimetic behavior dating back to Miacids in the Eocene epoch 60 million years ago and possibly even back into the Tertiary period. In other words, packs of donosaurs may have even rolled in shit and carcasses. But bears are not pack animals? Or were they when they first diverged from ancestral Caniformia ("dog-like") and went up into the trees.

 

[CANGAS]

I have personally observed a German Sheperd dog, very very familiar to me over many many years, roll on her back , very obviously of her choice, and apparently of her pleasure, on the putrid carcass of a dead songbird.

Star was a very dog-like German Sheperd.

 

[tablariddim]

I said:

I got it... it's a trophy smell. It's the smell associated with the hunt and the kill and is bound to impress. When dogs come upon the smelly stuff, a natural compulsion is triggered and they feel that they have to roll around in it to acquire the smell and it is evident that they enjoy it immensely. I think it has been proved that it doesn't act as camouflage. ”

And you said:

There is no doubt. Absolutely no question about this! And it is an accepted fact by ALL animal behavior biologists, that canidae species - and a few others - roll in shit and carcasses to hide their smell from their prey. Anyone who denies this is just trying to be argumentative and is ignorant of the facts. Site your sources: been then, done that, and seen this!

I hope you do not try to make a habit of being dumb, stupid and argumentative all your life???


This is a scientific forum, not a science fiction forum. And blind unsubstantiated speculative or imaginative posts are just the same as posting fantasy. So I'm assuming that this thread has now gone into "Alice in Wonderland."

And now, after umpteen pages of Invert being on your case; you say:

This thread has allowed me to realize another plausible viewpoint, i.e., that they roll in shit and carcasses to bring back the scent of what they have found for the benefit of the pack. This was brought to my attention by the observations made at the Wolf Park in Indiana. I have consistently maintained that this is definitely a shared allelomimetic pack behavior - and it is!

"Deceitful"? "Vile"? "Foul"? Explain.

Well, you were vile and foul to me...hypocrite!

 

[valich]

But why do they roll in other DOG's shit? It just makes them more noticable.

Also please give a list of other predators with similar behaviour and as an extra question: why cats don't do it?

While researching this, I did also come across a veterinarian counselor who said some clients have told her that their cats like to roll in certain types of perfume.

 

[valich]

I said: And you said:
And now, after umpteen pages of Invert being on your case; you say:
Well, you were vile and foul to me...hypocrite!

Again, I apologize for not being as receptive to your viewpoint as I should have, but I believe that what you say is based on a "hunch," not fact. I do not see where anything posted has disproved the camouflage theory - lets call it a hypothesis - as you stated. And it is an accepted fact by all animal behavior biologists that I have ever known that canidae species - and a few others - roll in shit and carcasses to hide their smell from their prey. This is the most accepted hypothesis, many even do call it a theory, but now I have been made aware of a different plausible viewpoint, i.e., that they might be carrying the scent back, not as a "trophy," but to inform the pack that they have found a source of food. This would be in line with natural selection, but this does not explain why they would roll in shit.

Sorry for being dumb and stupid myself, but much more sorry for calling you the same. Must've been too late at night.

 

[tablariddim]

chill

 

[valich]

The only thing we know for certain is that it is a shared primitive allelomimetic pack behavior in all Canidae species. Since bears also scent roll, we can assume that it was instinctive in Miacids (Carnivora order) during the Eocene epoch 60 million years ago. Wolves diverged from this lineage into the Caniformia suborder ("dog-like") and bears then diverged into the Ursidae family (Ursus means bear). Back then dog's (Canids) had predators, so the camouflage hypothesis would make a lot of sense. No dogs are indigenous to the Americas. Ancestral wolves first crossed over from the Bering Strait land-bridge sometime over about or around 20,000 years ago. This behavior could very well have been passed down since the Tertiary period and served as camouflage back then. Perhaps we should look at rolling in shit and rolling in carcasses as being two separate types of behavioral traits.

 

[valich]

If we consider rolling in shit and carcasses as two separate behaviors, then the "trophy" hypothesis has merit for rolling in carcasses while the "camouflage" hypothesis has merit for rolling in shit, but are wolves that intelligent to "instinctively" know the difference?

Scent rolling is probably a way for wolves to bring information back to the pack. 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.