Natural History

Posted in dog domestication, wild dogs, wolves, working dogs | Tagged dog domestication | 1 Comment

One Response

1. on August 26, 2010 at 10:48 am Lane Batot

   Yes, EXACTLY–most of this is common sense, of course, and quite a bit of evidence to back it up, which is why Coppinger’s “theory” is so poorly researched and thought out. The most you can say for his theory is that his notions are how ONE TYPE of dog developed(and continue to this day)–the Pariah type dogs. but sorry, Mr. C., wolves and humans were associated LONG before settled, agricultural villages began in the Neolithic, or even the late Mesolithic eras, that some dates are pushing simple, early agriculture back to. The Paleo-Indians that first came across the Bering land bridge had dogs(distinguishable from wolves), and this was in the Paleolithic(the frikkin’ Ice Age, for goodness sakes!), long, long before agriculture and settled villages. Think of all the meat leftovers from the killing of megafauna like mammoths, mastodons, giant sloths, etc., and how obviously this would be a great attractant to carnivores like wolves–the most natural thing to occur imaginable! The gutpile from a mammoth alone would be enormous! Then think of Coppinger’s theory–a large, social carnivore “decides” to start making a living scavenging human poop and what thin leavings were available from early agricultural villages–in other words, a mostly vegetable/grain diet. Can anyone who knows anything about wolves seriously think THAT is what happened???? No, the only reason any dogs did that, is because they were already DOGS, no longer wolves(and able to live on their own in the wild, therefore), and had no choice in the matter!

   
   

Comments are closed.