Dog and man

Along with cattle and pigs, dogs are among the oldest domesticated domestic animals in the world. While pigs and cattle are nowadays only kept as so-called "farm animals", the dog has made the transition into the living rooms of its owners and it is impossible to imagine our modern society without it as a "loyal companion".

Domestication

All our domestic animals were taken from "wild life" into the home and farm by our ancestors at some point in history and domesticated. By domestication we mean breeding or rearing a species of animal so that it can live and reproduce "in captivity". The reasons for such efforts and travails were primarily to make use of the animals as livestock or food. While pigs were kept very early in China to be slaughtered and eaten, settlers kept castrated bulls to help till fields and pull heavy ploughs or loads. Dogs first appear in anthropological research as hunting and herding helpers. Researchers still disagree about the point in time when "the wolf" was domesticated as a domestic animal. According to current studies, this date varies between 100,000 and 15,000 years ago in the late Ice Age. Experts agree that prehistoric man went to considerable lengths for this animal, since breeders in the past, as today, can neither domesticate nor socialise adult wolves.... unless the breeder has the animals already in puppyhood. To feed pups without dams, women will have stepped in as so-called "mammaries". While this idea sounds very strange nowadays, in prehistoric times wet nurses were not uncommon. Of course, this "custom" was not limited to the rearing of wolf pups, but first of all to help within tribes or groups of people where, for example, a woman could not feed/breastfeed her own child.

From this time comes the term "milk siblings", which refers to two unrelated people who were not born of one mother, but very much nursed by the same woman. At one point, therefore, a wolf pup will also have been the "milk brother" of a human child. This theory was first put forward by French anthropologists and evolutionary biologists and caused some discussion in scientific circles.

Socialisation

Many of our domesticated farm and domestic animals are very well domesticated, but not socialised in any way. By socialised animals we mean all those animal species that are not only able to live near humans, but also "subordinate" themselves to humans per se. The dog has this characteristic through a similarly arranged system of hierarchy within packs. Instead of the "alpha animal" of a pack, the dog then puts its owner, or holder, in the place of the pack leader. Favoured by the character of dogs, these social formations result in very lasting and also close relationships between dog and human. Bonds that may very well also exist with cats or horses, but due to the character of the animals do not appear to be quite as profound as with dogs.

Socialisation dependent on "intelligence

Much like humans, the degree of socialisation depends on intelligence. Potentially intelligent animals will therefore socialise much more easily than other "less intelligent" animal species. In addition to dogs, this phenomenon can be observed explicitly in rats, ravens or dolphins. All these animals have an above-average intelligence for the animal kingdom.

From the farm to the city.

The first human settlements were surrounded by more or less spacious lands, where "agriculture and animal husbandry" played an ever-increasing role in the development of societies, as larger communities and tribes were often no longer able to support themselves with hunting and gathering alone.

In the early Middle Ages, more and more "urban communities" came together, but it was not uncommon for people to live within the cities but to cultivate fields or work in the surrounding areas. Due to the spatial limitation, the inhabitants in the early cities were not able to keep as many farm animals as was common in rural communities. This "tradition" has more or less continued until today. The choice to bring dogs and cats into the cities was due to the fact that both types of animals could fulfil their "farm animal character" even in a city. While dogs "guarded" houses and estates, cats kept the city's granaries free of mice and rats. Since stables were also not necessary for dogs and cats, the animals could easily be housed directly in their owners' living quarters.

Although horses, pigs, geese and chickens were also kept within the city walls of medieval cities, in fact only "dogs and cats" remain in modern times - if we disregard canaries and reptiles and fish, which can also be kept in smaller cages, or aquariums or terrariums. On the streets of our cities, however, we will really only cross the path of dogs or cats "running free". Most of these "free roamers" will also have an owner to return to during feeding times. Feral dogs and cats can pose some problems for cities and municipalities, as dogs in particular, in the spirit of their ancestors the wolves, tend to gather in packs and no one wants to have such a wild pack of dogs trotting along behind them when the shopper is on his way home with the groceries from the weekly market. Even if there is rarely any danger to life and limb, such a pack of dogs is quite capable of communicating very clearly the demand to please hand over the chickens and cutlets just bought from the butcher.

Now and then, such dogs become problems. In 2012, free-roaming dogs were caught and killed in several Ukrainian cities in order to present an optimal image to "the world" on the occasion of the European Football Championship. In some cases, animal protection organisations protested massively against such killings. In general, however, animal rights activists can unfortunately assume that such actions always take place as soon as a city or region experiences an increased influx of international visitors on the occasion of a special event. This is also a phenomenon of poorer countries or regions where the normal infrastructure does not include animal shelters or similar facilities, usually financed by private donations, to take care of free-roaming pets.

In western and more affluent societies, not only are free-roaming dog packs rather rare - our society has even declared war on "dog poo". A few decades ago, dog poop on the pavements was as much a part of an "urban settlement" as rats in backyards. Today, all that is no longer possible. Dog owners are required to collect the poop using small plastic bags and then dispose of it in rubbish bins.

This is certainly desirable for pedestrians, but it definitely eliminates "dog poop" as an urban cultural asset. This would make the rats in our backyards practically the only "cultural-animal souvenir" that we have preserved over the centuries in our cities from the Middle Ages. We can now all think about whether we would rather have dog poo on the pavements or rats next to the rubbish bins?

Humanisation of our pets.

After dogs and also cats no longer had to take on the characteristics or tasks of "farm animals", pet owners did not give up keeping these animals. Dogs and cats slipped into the status of "pets and companions". In other words, animals that increasingly slipped into the rank of family members and, depending on the social position of the owner, took on the role of "biological children" and still do today. Older or socially excluded people in particular cling to dogs and cats as a substitute for missing social contacts. In the generation of "single households", such a social role is by no means to be underestimated.

It is not at all surprising that with such a strong social bond between owner and pet, the animal rises in "rank" and is seen by the owner less as an animal and more as a "companion".

It goes without saying that all the dogs and cats in our homes thus have more or less melodious names. Almost every one of these animals also has his or her "place", blanket, toys or similar loveliness. But that's not all: veterinarians also issue "identification papers" for the four-legged friends, which are primarily intended as proof that vaccinations have been carried out, for example to avoid quarantine when travelling abroad. In the meantime, a chip has also been introduced on which information about the owner is stored. This makes it easier to identify the owner of a lost animal. Veterinary practices and animal shelters have the possibility to read these chips. Dogs are also registered in the tax register and owners pay a dog tax for which each dog receives a tax tag that is usually worn on the collar and in some places varies annually in colour and shape in order to be able to recognise "old expired tags" more quickly.

Dog owners criticise the dog tax at regular intervals and also demand a tax on cats.

In fact, the political rationale for the dog tax is slowly crumbling away, as originally municipalities and communities argued in favour of the tax levy with the potential additional expense of cleaning streets and public parks due to soiling from "dog poo". Now that dog owners themselves are required to dispose of these droppings with shovels and bags, the street cleaning argument is flawed. A possible abolition of the dog tax, however, is not even being discussed. It will presumably remain in full force for us, or rather for dog owners.

Wherever there is a tax, there must be insurance companies. Quite a few insurance companies now offer a wide variety of insurances for dogs, thus covering liability claims or other "minor annoyances" of everyday life as far as possible. To what extent such insurances are actually necessary would be left to the presence of mind of the dog owner. Representatives of such insurances like to paint the four-legged devil on the wall. However, pet owners should keep in mind when taking out such insurances that there would be very significant differences in dog breeds, which would put the potential damage capacity of a pensioner's dachshund far under a bushel compared to the potential of a large German shepherd. In this respect, pensioner dachshunds probably do not need the same coverage of a potential damage sum as a bad-tempered Doberman. Without questioning the honesty of an insurance agent, it is therefore imperative to ask during a consultation whether and what differences the insurance offers for different dog breeds and whether and how any differences in husbandry are taken into account in a contract.

Species-appropriate husbandry

Another point of discussion for dogs as well as cats would be "species-appropriate husbandry", which always gets most of the attention when animals are considered family members rather than mousers or lap and cuddle dogs. Although emotional affection certainly does not harm the animals, the affection can take on relatively bizarre forms that often cause animal welfare activists to frown. Rain jackets, snow shoes or fully furnished playrooms are certainly not things that dogs or cats urgently need for well-being.

Although city flats per se are a comparatively unfavourable place to keep animals in a species-appropriate manner, one keyword can be noted: Occupation with the animal. While dogs will probably quickly get the idea of "guarding" the territory, respectively the flat, cats will probably have to do without their hunting instinct, as most city flats do not house pantries with mice dangling from the shelves. Toys and games with cats, in which the animals can let off these hunting and reaction skills a little, would correspond exactly to a species-appropriate husbandry... even if the cat chases after colourful foam balls. Depending on the species, breeders or pet shop staff will often be able to provide valuable tips. It would be a good idea to ask, since dog owners regularly buy food, cat litter, leashes or toys in these shops anyway.

Another point for "species-appropriate" keeping would be to find the right animal for the right person. Future pet owners should therefore, if possible, ask themselves before acquiring a pet which animal species and, if applicable, which breed "fits" best to their living circumstances and habits. The question of whether a dog, cat or goldfish is best suited to a person's circumstances and living habits will become superfluous in most cases, since hardly anyone who loves cats will come out of the pet shop with a pug or a dachshund. Such a question does become important when people are considering giving an animal as a gift. Grandma Lieschen, who has had and loved cats all her life, will probably be less happy about a German shepherd. These considerations sound somewhat ridiculous, but they become a very tragic reality for many animal shelters during the holiday season. Whenever animals are bought and given away on the occasion of some holiday and then abandoned again during the holiday season. A lot of animal suffering could be avoided if people were aware of their responsibility when buying the animal. Cats and especially dogs will not only completely submit to the new owner, but also blindly rely on his "love and affection". It would be desirable if all pet owners were aware of this role and then also treated the animal with the necessary "respect".

The larger and more movement-intensive an animal is, the more a 2-room flat will be an unfavourable place to keep it. Nevertheless, even large dogs can live "happily" in such an environment - provided the owner provides an appealing balance and opportunities for the exercise the animal needs. In many places there are "dog places" where dog owners meet to let their animals romp around. It is not uncommon for these places to be run by clubs that unite certain dog breeds and also offer training for the animals.

Is dog training useful?

At the latest when an unleashed Doberman gallops towards you in a park like a warhorse and the owner joyfully announces with his arms waving that there is no need to be afraid because the dog "only wants to play", the galloped dog wishes for a duty that enables dog owners to have their animals "under control" even without leashes. In fact, this is very possible with dogs of any breed and nature.

This "learning ability" of dogs is neither new nor significantly limited. In the early days of domestication, hunters will have trained their four-legged hunting helpers to share or hand over the "prey". A behaviour that is by no means natural in animals. In further developments, dogs also served very successfully in armies or, with the Romans, as a fighting attraction in cruel circus performances. For this purpose, very massive dogs were bred whose skin and fur was so "thick and wrinkled" that opponents had great difficulty in injuring these layers of skin so severely that underlying vessels or organs would be damaged. Today, breeding associations assume that the MastinoNapoletano breed is a direct descendant of these Roman gladiator and war dogs of the Molossian breed. Molossians were used by the Romans in military campaigns as well as in fights against humans and animals in the arenas of the Roman Republic.

Later, the importance of "war dogs" decreased significantly. In the First World War 1914-1918, the army used dogs on the battlefields of Europe as "messengers" or to deliver written messages or small items of equipment.

Today, dogs are still used by the police, civil protection and private security companies. In addition to the task of warding off danger or attackers, service dogs usually have the task of "sniffing" for forbidden or dangerous substances at airports or borders or searching for survivors in rubble in crisis regions. The success rate of such dogs is very high, so that a "replacement" of these dog squads is not to be expected in the near future.

Privately owned dogs will not need to be trained to find explosives or drugs. But they will have to be trained to defend their owners under certain circumstances or simply to be "led" without a dog leash.

Various dog schools or independent dog trainers offer courses in which owners can playfully learn such simple commands with their dogs in their free time. Besides really useful commands and "tricks", such dog trainers often pay special attention to the "understanding" of dog and owner. Even with difficult dogs or very lively animals, everyday handling is very likely to improve considerably after such courses. Especially with larger or potentially aggressive dog breeds, such courses are a good guarantee for the safety of people and animals. A few years ago, there was a major debate about the keeping of so-called "fighting dogs" and the associated dangers for ordinary passers-by. In the debate, there was talk of "dog handler's licences", by which was meant the successful participation in such dog courses, in which owners learn to recall their dogs without a leash, even in critical situations. Instead of such a sensible method, the legislator finally agreed on banning the import and sale of the dog breeds concerned, or on requirements that vary from one federal state to the next, such as compulsory leashing and muzzling. While it is true that such fighting dogs have strength and character from which the public could expect a greater danger, in principle any "larger" dog would be capable of inflicting significant injuries on people and would also be trained accordingly by the owners. In this context, it is important for the owner to know that aggressive dogs, or dogs that attack and bite passers-by, are first taken to a shelter by the police and are very likely to be killed/ euthanised there on a court order. If you love your dog and want to keep it, you should make sure that it does not chase postmen around the block and bite them. For small and large dogs that have a somewhat high-spirited or perhaps playfully aggressive character, a dog training course will certainly not only make sense but also give the owner pleasure in spending time with his four-legged darling. The nice side effect of such courses is that the owner is able to have really well-behaved dogs whose skills can really impress. We just imagine "his dog" who would stay outside a supermarket even without a leash, without going along with strangers, or chasing a pack of cats who turn their noses at him. This is exactly the kind of thing dogs and owners learn in these dog courses. Good dog trainers also attach great importance to achieving this obedience not with crude "suppression" of the dog, but much more through a strengthened relationship of trust between dog and human. Such courses are not free of charge and in most cases they are not cheap either. Under certain circumstances, dog owners can get such courses a little cheaper through dog clubs. Animal shelters will certainly know which dog trainer or club offers such courses in the region or city. .

Please add 2 and 4.
A
A
A