Lassie Come Clone
I’m rather fond of dogs. But I can’t quite imagine cloning a beloved pet to the tune of $155,000.
Some people can, though. And not only can they imagine it, but they’ve paid to have it done.
Is this the height of decadence, denial of death, or devotion? You be the judge; I personally think it’s a bit of all three, including a hefty dose of the demented.
After all, a dog is—like most living creatures of any complexity—not a mere function of heredity. Environment plays a role, and so even by cloning you won’t necessarily get old Fido back, as some have already learned who’ve tried. There are also minor cosmetic variations that represent the result of characteristics of the uterine environment.
Lou Hawthorne is in charge of the San Francisco-based (where else?) endeavor, which he claims is the first to commercially clone dogs. The trailblazer was Missy, his mother’s beloved border collie/husky mix, from whom four clones have been produced.
Hawthorne’s 8-year old son Skye has gotten a pretty nice science project out of the process. But strangely enough, Hawthorne’s mother isn’t impressed with the results of the cloning:
“They’re not at all alike,” Ms. Hawthorne said of the old Missy and the new one. “In looks, they are a little bit, of course. But, I mean, the puppy is delicate and aggressive. Missy was robust and completely calm.” She added, “Missy wouldn’t come through my home and knock over every wineglass.”
Besides, she adopted another puppy not long after Missy died. “I already have a dog ”” a real dog.”
Ms. Hawthorne is mistaken about one thing: Missy’s clones are as “real” as any other dogs, despite their odd origins. But she’s not the only one who’s a bit confused. A Florida man who paid $155,000 for the thrill of having a clone of his deceased canine companion Lancelot had this to say about it:
Cloning means you could have the opportunity to have the same dog with you for your entire life.
No, Mr. Otto, just ask Ms. Hawthorne. It’s not the same dog over and over, any more than identical twins are the same person. Otto may be in for a few disappointments if he thinks otherwise.
This is what happens when people learn their science from (bad) science-fiction movies.
This story is really about stupid people who think life can or even should be without loss.
The brains of all intelligent beings, animal and human, respond to their environments. Events, patterns of interaction, nutrition, and other variables all activate neurotransmitters in the brain, which in turn help to build the neural networks and synapses in the brain. In other words, with biology and genetics you get the basic building blocks, but stimuli of many kinds and in varying patterns can and do all play a part in the architecture of the brain. From there, you get personality and abilities. The more general traits are inherited in some form, but they can be altered according to nurture and experience.
Truly, I cannot relate to people who want to so control the outcomes and patterns in life that they want cloned animals and humans. I think we need to look very closely at the reasons for cloning. There may be very valid, ethical medical reasons for doing it: to save lives and to allay disease. Not for really superfluous reasons.
All can think of is Stephen King’s “Pet Sematary”
I think we should clone cats not dogs. They do not leave such a large carbon footprint as dogs do.
Without putting too fine a point on it neo, regarding misconceptions on what cloning actually consists of what did you expect from the American public?
I’ve come to the conclusion in the past year that the majority of the nation is made up of either the willfully ignorant or morons….
Talk about dumb people, there is a cycle to life and dogs really do cycle faster, but that’s life. I have a great Brittany hunting dog that hunted his last season a year ago, I did not realize it was his last but he has become lame in one of his hips and now he is just another half lame, hairy, old guy, kind of like his owner.
I think the Lord gave us dogs as special creatures to love us and help us and each dog is just as unique as each human. We need to love, appreciate and respect our little friends and enjoy them while we have them, how hard is that?
My dog gave me his best during his last eight years as a wonderful hunting companion, he should have had about two more strong years but that’s not the way it worked out. His disire is there but his body can’t keep up anymore.
Now it is up to me to give him the remainder of his years as a good couch dog and companion to my five year old granddaughter in peace and comfort.
Both dogs and cats serve a purpose since we are so far removed from living off the land and these little four legged creatures are a connection to a time when they really earned their keep, whether herding or catching rats and mice.
Now for folks to think they can whip up another critter just the same as the one they had and I suppose flush the original away when it does not meet their needs seems to be the height of egotistical absurdity. Pet.2 will never be the same as Pet.1.
In our case my pup shared long rides with me going to hunt pheasant where we froze to death and he had to be restrained from hunting too hard when we were shooting doves and it was too hot out. Each wonderful jopurney out shaped the two of us just a bit more and we helped each other accomplish the task at hand and grow.
My dog Happy is the culmination of a lot of shared experiences, training, hunting and just hanging out having a good time and there will never be another like him. He is a far better dog than I am a person and he holds me to a higher standard and he deserves to be remembered as the individual creature he is.
His look of disdane when I missed a bird I should have hit was great. Here communicated that he was present and ready to go to work and what the heck was I doing messing up on my end of the deal.
I am not sure if I want another pup at my age and current circumstances but if I do get another I would like for it to be from the same bloodline but it will be its own unique self and that will be fine.
This life stuff is not that hard, the minute we are born we are destined to live out our lives and die so it is up to each of us to have as meaningful of a trip as possible and enjoy the presence of each other, human and critter.
I am also enough of a sap to think that dogs probably go to heaven and I hope I am lucky enough to see some of my old furry friends up there some day.
While reading this, all I could think of was Re-Pet from the lame Swartzaneger flick 6th day.
Great comment, OldTexan. I’m not a hunter and I’m more of a cat person, but I think you nailed it.
Several years ago, I was living in an apartment. My neighbor had a beautiful long-haired black female cat. Sometimes I would cat-sit when my neighbor was away. Eventually the cat had three kittens and I adopted two of them.
Of the three kittens, one was male; two were female. One was long-haired; two were short-haired. All of them were black. I got to see the four of them together (including the mother) until the kittens were about six months old. Although they superficially looked alike, I was blown away by how different their personalities were. They were individuals in the truest sense of the word.
Great post, OldTexan.
I was despondent when my beloved golden retriever Bud died on Christmas Eve a couple of years ago, but I wouldn’t have dreamt of cloning him, regardless of how much I missed (and still miss) him. It would seem …sacrilegious, as it were, and more than a bit narcissistic. He shared his life with me, for which I am eternally grateful, but his life wasn’t about me, it was about him.
In his wonderful book The Blank Slate Steven Pinker talks about the effects of genes on the organism’s behavior and capabilities and goes into great detail about genes which are present but are only turned on if other genes are present and either turned on or off and the switching is something which can be caused either by the presence of yet another gene or by an environmental event which can even occur in utero. This is probably a weird and incorrect example but it captures my point:
What if the mother dog hears a loud noise in the fifth week of pregnancy and the noise startles her, causing a fight or flight response and a lot of adrenaline gets dumped into her system, causing the switching on of a gene which causes the switching off of another? Might be a totally different doggie personality or even appearance. Cloning wouldn’t address that.
One other thing about the cloning: it’s not like there aren’t a few million dogs that are literally dying for a home. We need to create them in a lab? (And that’s laboratory.)
Part of life is learning about death, and real men (and women too!) will shed deeply felt tears when their dog dies. Somehow they just seem to tap into a part of us that nothing else can touch.
This whole cloning thing just seems to me to ….well, cheapen it somehow. Kind of like the ultimate expression of a disposable society.
The attitude seems to be, so what if your dog dies? No problem, just replace him with a reasonable facsimile.
It’s not a mindset I understand.
Hell, it took me 8 years to get over it enough the last time one of my dogs died (Norwegian Elkhound) to agree to get another when my son pestered me enough for a puppy.
Now we have a happy little Pekingnese that runs the kids til they’re tuckered out ( or is it the dog that’s tuckered out, kind of hard to tell…lol).
neo,
My wife and I love dogs too. We don’t have one because we both work. Sometimes I can work at home instead of driving in to the office in Portsmouth. Even so, as much as we love dogs, we decided not to get one because dogs are very social animals. We know people who get dogs and then leave them home alone during the day or even leave them in a crate all day. That is cruel and unnatural. Our in-laws and some friends have dogs, but that’s because someone is at home all day and thus the dog has a human companion who can walk the dog and take him or her out for their natural functions.
We enjoy the dogs in our families and with our friends. I thoroughly agree that dogs are God’s special creatures, made for us, to love us unconditionally and even teach us a thing or two about loyalty, family, and friendship. And all dogs need a job. Their lives are not complete without one. Anyone who has looked into the eyes of a dog or a wolf is looking into the mind of a very intelligent creature. Granted, they all have variances in the level of intelligence, but it’s there for anyone to see. I never cease to be amazed at how intuitive they are and how they learn how to associate words and sounds with things or events that should take place.
That Muhammad could declare dogs to be unclean and evil says more about him than about dogs. That he could see no positive qualities about them speaks volumes about his ability to perceive the positive qualities that are plainly there for any normal human being to see. I have always found it fascinating that it is primarily the Northern peoples who have appreciated the dog’s qualities above and beyond his value as a worker/hunter. The Northern peoples understood the companion qualities of this creature.
I’ve not thought too deeply about this subject — cloning a dog — but I have thought glancingly about it. And those thoughts with these neo-neocon proposes lead me to others, perhaps worthwhile, perhaps not. We’ll see.
So to the dog story. My sister had got a dog — Angus, he came to be called — a saveling from the pound, doomed to be put down as a puppy had Sis not taken him in. The pound, however, had already neutered this dog and that was fine, Sis was happy with him and he was (and is) happy to have a home. Nothing unusual about any of that. Whereupon, I get to meet Angus a few months later round about his first birthday and see what a splendid dog he is, what a fine specimen of his type (Catahoula Leopard).
So begin my thoughts on cloning. For I think, now, Angus has no testicles, they’ve been removed from him. There is simply no way for him to reproduce. But ah! Cloning, I think, is a way. Now I’m not thinking about cost here (for I know nothing about that, nor care, really, since I’m merely musing on the question of sexual reproduction in the face of this impossibility), this isn’t about death, nor devotion, nor even decadence…
We’re Angus to be cloned, his twin would be born with his testicles intact and would, all things being equal, be able to reproduce in the ordinary way, with all the chance, all the roll of the dice which sexual reproduction entails, albeit with the helping hand — in the case of a dog whose breed one wishes to enhance — of human intervention as to mate choice. His dame would, I assume, be chosen for him.
Now however, lets leave off with Angus and think for a moment of a hypothetically analogous human story.
Suppose for a moment a childless human being whose gonads have been destroyed. Prior to the onset of the possibility of cloning, nothing could be done to help this person reproduce. They have simply lost out in the lottery of life, their unique complement of genetic material would not have the opportunity to combine with another’s, they won’t have children who could have children and so on down the ages in the ordinary way. It’s tough, but that’s the way it is and had to be.
After the onset of the possibility of cloning however, this formerly insurmountable barrier is, for all practical intents, removed. Now it becomes a question of costs, of motivations, of another new set of chances (will the twin want to have children, will he or she find a mate, will the children have children, etc.?) all the reproductive uncertainties faced by any nominally normal reproducer. It is not a question of certainties but certainly a question of possibilities.
And here comes the rub. Who decides? Who has the power, the right, the say-so to determine whether this is to be a possibility? Science can do the work, knows what and how to do what needs to happen to make a twin (let us assume for the sake of the hypothetical) and thus bring about this reproductive possibility. Is it up to us to step in to say no, not in our lifetimes will you, you unfortunate eunuch, you sad and barren soul, see your genes living into some future world?
And about dogs and Muhammad, I have a hunch I know the reason why Muhammad hated them. And it’s not very complicated. Critic of Islam, Ali Sina, himself a former Muslim cleric and scholar from Iran, has written a book that does a psychological profile of the Prophet, and classifies Muhammad as narcissistic personality disordered. In Muhammad’s day in Arabia and the surrounding lands guards were used for hunting and guarding. It was not uncommon for wealthy men to have dogs at their sides. I cannot prove this and I am only going on my hunch about what type of person Muhammad was. First of all, dogs ARE VERY GOOD at having an intuitive grasp about a person’s basic nature. They KNOW good people from bad people. They can sense a cruel or mean person. It is my guess that Muhammad’s encounters with dogs were very unfavorable. The dogs had his number and probably snarled and barked at him. They didn’t love him one bit and narcissists hate anything that will not feed their need to be loved and admired. Muhammad’s natural cruelty and viciousness would not have endeared him to this creature of God. And so he cursed them and declared them unclean, even having his sock puppet deity declare dogs to be cursed.
Error in my above post: In Arabia and surrounding lands DOGS (not guards, as I had written) were used for hunting and guarding.
Working the keyboard too quickly…
“But strangely enough, Hawthorne’s mother isn’t impressed with the results of the cloning…”
I don’t see what’s strange, unless it’s the mother failing to pay slavish attention (or lip service) to the son’s hopes, and instead paying attention to the evidence of her own senses.
Color me confused at that being thought strange…
Scottie, I can definitely relate to your experiences, in several aspects.
I grew up with a Norwegian Elkhound, and had many great times with her.
And when my golden retriever died a few years ago, I blubbed like a six year old, I’m not ashamed to admit. He was my best friend, and I miss him to this day. It was over a year before we adopted another golden retriever pup, largely because it took me that long to get over the late, great Bud. Before then I couldn’t look at another puppy without thinking of the other end of the cycle of life, and becoming sad.
Fred, as for not having dogs because of their social nature, and your work, I recommend having more than one. We have two (the golden and a mutt), and that keeps them both happy. I now work from home (lucky me!) and my wife is at home as well (lucky her!), but previously we both worked outside the home and having two dogs worked well, as they kept each other company.
And as for Mohammed not liking dogs, I suspect that was because he was a shit, and the dogs knew it.
A friend of mine who’s a cop said he could always tell a lot about a household by how any animals in it acted towards the people.
This is a good thing. $155,000 is taken from an idiot and given to someone who can use it. God hates idiots and, given a chance, always finds way to punish and humiliate them.
Somehow i see a connection in people who think their pet should live as long as them and the climate of the planet they were born into should fall in line too.
Great points from Bob Sykes and SteveH. To your point, Steve, I believe the term “solipsistic” covers such people nicely.
Occam,
Since you know elkhounds you’ll love these stories.
When my son was a year old we had some carpet installed in our home, which was an old farmhouse we were renovating.
Since my wife and I worked during the day, we had my mother who babysat for us let the workers into the house to install the carpet.
There were 4 men, the largest of which was apparently over 6 feet tall and some 300 pounds.
Jake thoroughly intimidated all of them!
My mother had to stand in the yard with Jake while she held our son so they could go in and out with the carpet, and the entire time he just kept circling my mother and son constantly (like a cat she said) while watching the men installing the carpet.
He was obviously being protective.
They would not get out of the vehicle unless she was standing there, and they all left practically holding hands at the same time as they gently crept back across the drive to their vehicle to leave…lol.
Mom thought it was hilarious…lol.
Another time a cousin was visiting. We were just standing there shooting the bull and joking. Well, being the rednecks we were it did get just a bit boisterous about kicking someone’s can – all in good natured fun btw…lol.
Anyway, Jake walks up and just stands beside me and I scratch him between the ears. He was big enough I didn’t even have to bend over to do it, and did it really without thinking about it as I did it all of the time.
Anyway, at one point my cousin takes a step forward towards me and is all swaggering and joking still – and Jake takes one step forward, looks up at him straight in the eye, and you more sensed the rumbling growl than heard it as it came up from somewhere wayyyyyyy down deep.
I honestly was shocked, as we were joking around. My cousin on the other hand turned white as a ghost, froze in his tracks, then took a couple of slow steps back and said “never mind”….
After he did that, Jake just nonchalantly sat down beside me with his tongue out and enjoyed being scratched between the ears again…lol.
Now before anyone analyzes the dog, I do want to point out that he was always protective and watchful anytime anyone came over who he didn’t know.
He was never like that unless there was something really odd going on that he didn’t like or a stranger was around , and all anyone had to do was back up and he was fine – and he never – ever – bit a soul.
But he could intimidate the living hell out of them and he knew it!
I even miss how he would howl sometimes…sounded just like a wolf – which is what he looked like.
Scottie, must be a breed trait. Our elkhound did exactly the same thing. When a stranger came over, she used to stand pointedly in between us and the stranger, and moved as necessary to maintian that position, never taking her eyes off the stranger. It must have been pretty intimidating, since she was good-sized, and of course elkhounds have that wolf-thing going on in appearance.
Now our goldens, on the other hand, wag furiously whenever a stranger appears. They don’t have an aggressive bone in their bodies; everyone is their pal. They’re hopeless as guard dogs, but great as love bunnies!
Occam,
Is there a way to get a guard breed like the Elkhound to accept a friend or trusted acquaintance as being part of the trusted pack? Are they adaptable that way?
Fred, sure.
Actually, they’re pretty astute in reading pack members reaction to a stranger. They don’t exhibit the protective behavior when friends or family come over, but only do so with strangers (e.g., workmen). (I’m generalizing from ours pups (my parents had four over as many decades), but I suspect that it’s a valid generalization).
For example, I’d left home at 17, and lived all over the world, and so only returned to visit every few years. Several times I returned to meet a new elkhound who’d never seen me before, but each time the dog instantly accepted me, apparently gauging my parents’ reaction.
If you think cloning a dog is odd, how about cloning a Brahman bull? In LaGrange, TX a family decided to clone their pet bull “Chance,” which died unexpectedly (though from old age), because he was such a gentle, friendly creature. That, and they used him commercially in film and advertising. (Chance V1.0 had a bit role in the film “The Locusts.”)
However, “Second Chance” – the clone – wasn’t quite as tame and calm as the original, and as the Fishers originally claimed. Second Chance attacked Ralph Fisher not once, but twice, the second being caught on tape by a crew from “This American Life,” a Showtime video version of the NPR radio show.
Biologically identical? Sure. Behaviorally? Not so much.
FredHjr,
I’ll defer to Occam a little bit only inasmuch as he’s been around more elkhounds than I have – but I will second what he stated.
They are exceptionally good at reading how their *pack members* respond to *non-pack members*.
The reason they are so good at this is because they are so damn smart it’s difficult for anyone who hasn’t been around them much to really understand exactly what kind of animal they’re dealing with.
I grew up with hunting hounds, boxers, pit bulls, mongrels, german shepards, and even a few german shepard wolf mixes – but none of them ever displayed the kind of intelligence Jake did.
As for being “guard dogs”, yes they can fill that role – but they are so much more than that, that it’s leaving them a bit short to call them “guard dogs”.
If you take one into your life and make him a part of your family, he’ll respond to that relationship and you’ll have far more than a simple “guard dog” – you’ll have an incredibly beautiful, healthy, intelligent friend and family member for life.
Jake, who could intimidate a man several times his own weight and who could snap a ham bone (his favorite thanksgiving treat – even though some may criticize me for having let him have them once a year) with a single crushing bite, would also let my year old son crawl all over him like a jungle gym and pull his ears as he hugged him tightly without ever so much as a grumble or hint of annoyance. My son was just another member of the pack…lol.
The only thing I would add is that because the animal IS so intelligent, it does require a strong personality in the owner to handle such a creature sometimes if you get one that decides he can intimidate you.
This wikipiki entry is pretty accurate if you want to know more, and does go into a little bit of their personality quirks. They’re not the dog for everyone, but for someone who is willing to take the time with them required they are going to spoil you on any other kind of dog.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norwegian_Elkhound
Damn I miss Jake….
I just finished reading about the Norwegian Elkhound via the wiki link you provided, Scottie. What an amazing dog! I was surprised to see a longevity of 12-16 years, since medium to larger dogs tend to have short life spans.
FredHjr,
I’m sure I’m going to get some flack from someone on this next statement – but I honestly think they’re smarter, and yes generally healthier, than German Shepards.
And I love German Shepards!
Now there may be someone who knows more on the subject than I do (God knows it wouldn’t be difficult to find such a person!), but I do have a suspicion regarding the health qualities and general longevity of German Shepards – as well as numerous other breeds such as pit bulls and such.
My theory is that many of these larger breeds have gone through a phase of too much popularity.
When that happens, you have a lot of people breeding animals for all of the wrong reasons – and the overall health of the breed is not necessarily an important issue in popular culture when this happens.
As a result, you have a lot of poor breeding practices develop that damage the overall health of the breed in question.
I remember when German Shepards were extremely popular – I think it was the mid to late 70’s? – as guard dogs. Maybe that was because Shepards were used by military, and a lot of ex-servicemen wanted one themselves after the massive reductions in the armed forces during that era.
Then it was Dobermans in the ’80’s. Zeus and Apollo from Magnum PI. No need for further comment I think.
Then Pit Bulls I believe in the ’90s and into the present. They just ended up with a misunderstood reputation that drew certain idiots to want that kind of dog.
These are trends I noticed at the time – and I would like to point out the breeds we had predated these trends. We lived in the country and big tough dogs were just what was preferred.
Anyway, during these phases of overpopularity the breeds were sought out by idiots who weren’t thinking past wanting the biggest baddest dog they could find as a means of propping up their street cred.
The Norwegian Elkhound so far has apparently managed to stay below pop culture’s radar. As a result there are fewer of them around than say, Dobermans or German Shepards, but the ones that you do see are going to generally be in pretty good health as a rule if their owners have taken decent care of them.
At least that’s my theory….
By extension, I’m surprised there seems to have been no discussion by the cloning crowd in having themselves cloned, in their present; The perfect twin and companion, if you don’t happen to be schizophrenic…
Oh, I vote this “Best Title of 2009”!
Wow. Go Big or Go Home, er, “clone”….
Now our goldens, on the other hand, wag furiously whenever a stranger appears. They don’t have an aggressive bone in their bodies; everyone is their pal. They’re hopeless as guard dogs, but great as love bunnies!
Wagging of the tail just means that they are excited, not that they are calm or happy to see someone. In fact, you can see dogs bite people because their tails were wagging as a warning that they were anxious or afraid or too excited.
Anyway, at one point my cousin takes a step forward towards me and is all swaggering and joking still – and Jake takes one step forward, looks up at him straight in the eye, and you more sensed the rumbling growl than heard it as it came up from somewhere wayyyyyyy down deep.
That’s a territorial warning to back off, often seen amongst canines, which include wolf packs.
The real problem here is that if the dog is taking this action on its own, then it can think it is the pack leader or at least responsible for defending certain members of the pack. It means that you aren’t the leader in his eyes ; ) This is not a good idea all in all. Because no matter how smart the dog or how well behaved, the human bears ultimate responsibility for what that dog does. Which means you had better be in control.
I honestly was shocked, as we were joking around.
Dogs can actually read human body language. Even if we can substitute some of our social settings on top of body language rading, the dogs just reading the body language.
Is there a way to get a guard breed like the Elkhound to accept a friend or trusted acquaintance as being part of the trusted pack? Are they adaptable that way?
According to the Dog Whisperer, any dog can accept any other dog of any other breed or trait or whatever so long as the human is recognized as the pack leader and has successfully socialized both dogs. This includes strange humans as well. If you are the pack leader and you accept that person, then the dog automatically follows your guide if it recognizes your dominant role. If it doesn’t, then it’ll do whatever it wants to do.
Just look up some of his episodes Fred, if you want some kind of guide. The training and discipline is very easy to do. All you have to do is to change his (the dog’s) initial reaction to a stranger. Meaning, unless the dog trusts you to look after him and yourself, the dog is going to stand up and do a guard behavior regardless of what you want. If you are angry, afraid, or excited, that will incite the dog to even attack in some cases. Because the more excited a dog’s humans are, the more excited that dog is and dogs don’t have human social rules to keep them in check. The fact that its users feel fear that their dog will bite someone will actually increase the anxiety of their dog and make a bite more probable. Dogs are very social animals in this respect, far more than us, both because of their noses and their pack mentality.
The only thing I would add is that because the animal IS so intelligent, it does require a strong personality in the owner to handle such a creature sometimes if you get one that decides he can intimidate you.
When a dog thinks it owns you rather than the other way around, we have a problem.
My theory is that many of these larger breeds have gone through a phase of too much popularity.
Inbreeding which causes organ failure early on and other defects.
Ymarsakar,
OK, this is going to be long only because you are so far off base here.
First, it looks like you completely ignored this passage that I wrote:
“Now before anyone analyzes the dog, I do want to point out that he was always protective and watchful anytime anyone came over who he didn’t know.
He was never like that unless there was something really odd going on that he didn’t like or a stranger was around , and all anyone had to do was back up and he was fine – and he never – ever – bit a soul.”
Ignoring what I wrote, you go on to note the incident with the cousin and offer your generally ill informed analysis of an animal you never laid eyes on.
Quoting you now:
“That’s a territorial warning to back off, often seen amongst canines, which include wolf packs.”
Cute quote, wonder where you cut and pasted that little gem from?
Anyway, you go on:
“The real problem here is that if the dog is taking this action on its own, then it can think it is the pack leader or at least responsible for defending certain members of the pack. It means that you aren’t the leader in his eyes ; ) This is not a good idea all in all. Because no matter how smart the dog or how well behaved, the human bears ultimate responsibility for what that dog does. Which means you had better be in control.”
Wrong.
It was not a “territorial warning” – after all, the guy had been on the property – the “pack territory”, if you will – for hours at that point, often in close proximity to Jake, without incident.
His response was a protective warning regarding the personal safety of a member of the “pack” of which Jake considered himself a member of. Up to that point Jake had never even acted like he noticed the guy.
It was only when he acted aggressively towards a member of the “pack” that Jake responded.
If you were familiar with how packs work, you’d realize that it doesn’t have to be the alpha animal that responds, as all members of a tight pack will respond to anything they think may be a threat to the pack or a member of the pack when they are immediately faced with a situation, and will do so with or without any “leadership” from an alpha.
I’ve seen it – not described to me in a book as you seem to be quoting in some apparent attempt to appear intelligent and informed on the matter – but rather by watching “packs” ranging from groups of small ankle biters to packs of hunting hounds that could range from 15 to 30 animals or more at a time (whitetail and fox hunting in eastern NC often involves rather large packs), to yes – “packs” – that included a mix of people and dogs that form a very tight knit family unit.
My knowledge doesn’t have the pedigree of some nice book on the best seller list – it’s from watching how packs operate first hand and actually living it.
Jake definitely knew his “place” in the pecking order and deferred to EVERYONE else in the pack – including my parents, siblings, wife, and in later years my very young son.
You tossed out an opinion without really knowing what you were talking about, and based upon just a few comments.
I would also point out once more that in the incident that you are so blithely analyzing – again without a shred of first hand knowledge of the animal or the events – that the dog in question DID NOT BITE anyone, and immediately backed off as soon as the cousin backed up and dropped his hands to waist level.
That’s called self control on the part of the animal – it also denotes intelligence in this instance, not a belief in pack superiority, and it’s not something to be criticized as a trait in the animal.
Something else I may not have clarified in the account is the fact that the incident took all of about a second, and that immediately after the cousin backed up Jake’s focus turned to me looking for attention and approval.
That’s not the actions of an alpha.
Now, if I were to really get serious about ANALYZING your own comments, I’d point out that police and military ALSO train their guard dogs to respond in a certain way.
One means is by having trainers mock attack the dog or the dog’s handler while wearing protective gear. Obviously the trainers are play acting in this case, albeit with very serious intent.
Next time you see a K-9 police officer with his animal, how about you try to approach him speaking in a loud voice in a threatening manner and raise your hands?
Hmmm, I wonder what kind of response you’ll get from his dog?
Bear in mind that K-9 animals are also typically on a leash, Jake wasn’t.
Of course, if the dog responds as Jake did with a simple growled warning then that obviously means – according to your painfully ill informed analysis – that the officer in question in fact does not have control over his animal and the animal in fact considers himself to be the alpha.
Actually, my gut feeling is the response from the K-9 dog will be far more, shall we say *energetic*, than the behaviour that Jake displayed.
Additionally, consider if the situation was such that the cousin had NOT been joking, and in fact had been about to, or did, physically attack me or another member of my family?
I guess in your world Jake was not supposed to even move or growl until ordered to attack the guy!
One other little thing I’ll toss out. Yes, you are correct in that the owner is responsible for what the dog does.
This is the rule and it’s a good one.
Anyone who has a large breed needs to accept that rule or not have a dog. Hell, anyone even with a small breed must accept that responsibility!
HOWEVER, you can never – ever – absolutely “control” any animal.
We talk about how one has to “control” their animals, but it’s a slightly inaccurate concept.
Dogs have a brain, teeth, and claws, and while you may train and encourage certain behaviour there is always the fact that they still have a brain.
That’s something anyone who was raised in the country or on a farm knows, and it’s going to be true of any animal.
They are not robots, they are living creatures, and thus there is always that element of unpredictability no matter how remote it is. It’s a concept that many urban types don’t understand until it’s too late.
Then there is my statement you quoted:
“The only thing I would add is that because the animal IS so intelligent, it does require a strong personality in the owner to handle such a creature sometimes if you get one that decides he can intimidate you.”
My point is that some animals by their nature are strong willed. Even the wikipiki article noted this as one of the traits of this breed – and it’s a trait of numerous other large breeds. Because of this trait, this breed does require a firm hand from the person responsible for the dog – which is what I was clearly alluding to.
Anyway, you responded completely out of left field with this:
“When a dog thinks it owns you rather than the other way around, we have a problem.”
You make a HUGE leap from the simple fact that some breeds are strong willed – which in your inadequate analysis you completely missed or ignored – to claiming that “the dog thinks it owns you rather than the other way around”.
Just another piece of evidence that you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about, and besides, I prefer to think of dogs more as family rather than as objects to be “owned”.
One last thing, then I have work to get back to.
Anyone who tells you that a dog can be completely “controlled” is either a damn fool or trying to sell you something – probably a book on the subject….
At best you can train the animal to be more predictable – but there will always – ALWAYS – be that element of the animal known as their brain, and that you cannot ever fully control.
So please, go back to the book store or wherever it is you got your reading material from and get your money back.
I’ve seen it – not described to me in a book as you seem to be quoting in some apparent attempt to appear intelligent and informed on the matter
You know Scottie, you should really divorce yourself from your dogs so that you don’t take a comment about your dogs as a personal attack upon yourself.
You do understand that this is completely neurotic?
So please, go back to the book store or wherever it is you got your reading material from and get your money back.
I could play your little game of arguing about the things you brought up, but it is obvious you are not interested in an intellectual debate. You are interested in protecting your identity, which is linked with that of your dogs. I could argue with you on this score, but it’d be like arguing the military is necessary to a pacifist. It’s pointless.
Be aware, Scottie, that I included several quotes that I was replying to, not just your own. Whatever psychological angst you have is because of your own choice to make it personal. I wash my hands of any responsibility on this score.
Ymarsakar,
Hmm, so now I’m emotionally unstable because I have strong feelings for a creature to which I developed a deep personal attachment?
I assume that’s what you meant by “neurotic”?
Perhaps instead you should evaluate your own life in case you’ve never felt such an attachment to another living creature that didn’t happen to walk on two legs?
If this is the case, you’ve obviously missed one of life’s great pleasures – as well as one of it’s greatest lessons.
I’m sure you could probably even google some sort of psyciatric or psychological treatise on the health benefits of a person having a close relationship with a pet.
BTW, note that I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here – which is more than you’ve provided in your posts as you hold forth at length regarding the “problems” with the animal in question.
I pointedly noted a warning about the dog being analyzed, so when you felt free to do it anyway I certainly felt free to correct you on your numerous errors.
As is clear by now, you knew little about the situation, the dog in question, or more generally about how dogs interact – yet felt free to diagnose anyway.
A mistake that, not content with your first failure, you’ve decided to repeat by now attempting to diagnose me as well – even though you again know little about me.
Kind of silly….or stupid…but since we’re being generous we’ll stick with silly for the moment.
Now that that is out of the way, how about responding to the points I made that refute everything you tried to assert, rather than curling up behind psycho-babble?
Hmm, so now I’m emotionally unstable because I have strong feelings for a creature to which I developed a deep personal attachment?
Thanks for admitting you took my comments personally, then. That, however, doesn’t excuse your rude behavior and outrageous responses.
Perhaps instead you should evaluate your own life in case you’ve never felt such an attachment to another living creature that didn’t happen to walk on two legs?
The natural human desire to attack those that you see as threatening you, your family, or your identity is natural. It is also contemptible. Are you a human being given free will by God or are you just a proto-plasmic puppet ruled by your instincts and base emotions? You have a responsibility as an adult to hold your emotions in check and actually find out whether your fears or emotions reflect an accurate portrayal of reality before you act upon those emotions. You are not a child with a child’s excuse of lack of discipline. I expect you to hold yourself to a higher standard than simple knee jerk reflexes.
BTW, note that I am giving you the benefit of the doubt here
Stop lying, Scottie. Who do you think you are fooling here? This is me you are talking to, not a Leftist drone beholden to identity politics and MSM propaganda.
Proof is in the pudding:
Ignoring what I wrote, you go on to note the incident with the cousin and offer your generally ill informed analysis of an animal you never laid eyes on.-S to me
I am so gracious that you gave me the benefit of the doubt by telling me I ignored what you wrote. I am also gracious that you sought fit to name my “analysis” “ill informed” just cause you felt very strongly on the issue.
I’ve seen it – not described to me in a book as you seem to be quoting in some apparent attempt to appear intelligent and informed on the matter
That is very nice of you, Scottie, to give me the benefit of the doubt on my intentions for this matter. I would be much afraid of how you would have phrased things had you not given me that precious benefit of the doubt of yours.
You tossed out an opinion without really knowing what you were talking about, and based upon just a few comments.-S
Thanks again for that very polite and generous “benefit of the doubt”, Scottie. I don’t know what I would have done without it.
So please, go back to the book store or wherever it is you got your reading material from and get your money back.
Really, S, who do you think you are BSing here?
Now that that is out of the way, how about responding to the points I made that refute everything you tried to assert, rather than curling up behind psycho-babble?
I have no responsibility to respond to children harassing me with their rude and narcissistic demand that I devote my time to satisfying their emotional needs.
Until Neo-Neocon tells me that I have a personal responsibility to debate points with everybody that harasses me on her blog, I am free to address whatever points I wish to address. If that hurts your “feeeeelings” S, then I recommend you behave like an adult and not like an attack dog.
You have no idea of what I “tried to assert”. You have no intention of finding out. Just as I have no intention of satisfying your ego that demands a fight from me on this subject. You want to take your ball home and declare “victory”, go right ahead. I don’t really give a damn, except vis a vis that I had expected better standards from you, S. But we can’t all be adults that abide by common standards of decency and courtesy, now can we.
neurosis (n-rÅ’sÄs) Pronunciation Key
A psychological state characterized by excessive anxiety or insecurity without evidence of neurologic or other organic disease, sometimes accompanied by defensive or immature behaviors. This term is no longer used in psychiatric diagnosis.
That is the definition I used in the context that I used it.
Hope it helps.
Most people don’t react as strongly as you did without a personal reason. I knew it had something to do with your dog, but the exact reasons eluded me. Because you motivated me to pay so close an attention to this topic, I went back and re-read your comments and now I realize exactly what is motivating you. That’s very sad, but if you keep pressing me, Scottie, I assure you, I will very clearly outline what your problems are and not from a defensive curled up manner.
I have currently prevented your personal attacks from influencing my judgment on this matter. My responses are standard operating procedure to people who intentionally insult me after I gave them no intentional offense on my part. But if you keep pushing it, I cannot guarantee that I won’t make this personal myself.
You can apologize, you can retract your statements by saying they were excessive, or you can go away. Or you can continue to harass me, but I have given you fair warning and that is the best I can do at this time to give you a reason to change your current behavior.
Such strong reactions Ymarsakar – but again without really addressing what I said and preferring instead to attempt to analyze yet again without addressing what has now been directed specifically at you.
The same behaviour all over again, perhaps expecting a different outcome?
Allow me to refresh your memory, since you seem to be deliberately ignoring how you in fact ramped up this particular hullabaloo, and instead prefer to project the *blame* for this little tiff onto me instead of taking responsibility….as an adult would, I believe is how you would prefer to put it?
I related two simple stories regarding a creature who’s companionship I had the priviledge of enjoying for a very long time.
Those stories were simply meant to illuminate the animal – and generally the breed’s – character, and in my opinion both stories reflected positively on the breed.
Nothing more nor less at that point, and certainly nothing that millions of people throughout history have not also experienced and could relate to.
Also not something I expected someone to make a big issue out of.
You made the decision to come along after that and prounounce judgement on the dog – and me.
You claim I overreacted?
Here are some telling quotes:
“The real problem here is….” (referring to Jake).
“It means that you aren’t the leader in his eyes…” (referring to Jake).
“Because no matter how smart the dog or how well behaved, the human bears ultimate responsibility for what that dog does.” (referring to both me AND Jake).
“Which means you had better be in control.” (since you were repeatedly referring to Jake, then obviously this would be referring specifically to me).
“When a dog thinks it owns you rather than the other way around, we have a problem.” (responding specifically to my own statement which you quoted, already having diagnosed in your own mind that Jake had a problem and clearly directed at me).
Please note that you are the one who repeatedly spoke in derogatory terms regarding the “owner” who couldn’t “control” the dog.
Had nothing to do with identifying with any animal – but rather plenty of snide comments that could only be directed at me since I was clearly the “owner” of the dog in question.
You didn’t expect a response?????
Honestly????
Instead of saying what first popped to mind – I do respect neo after all – I instead provided detailed responses as well as reasons for the behaviour you brought up.
I provided obvious parallels to that behaviour, and left it to the reader to draw their own conclusions as to how far more highly trained dogs in similar situations would react.
I noted that my own responses are from real life experiences in dealing with the breed, as well as other dogs – and even other animals since I was raised in the country.
I did not feel the need to refer anyone to episodes of the “Dog Whisperer”.
It ain’t book learnin…it’s a lifetime of life lessons.
Your responses are clearly canned from somewhere other than real life – in which case I choose not defer to your judgement on the matter.
In all honesty, it appears to be infuriating to you.
Now going back through all that I wrote and all of the information I provided and all of the analogies I mentioned, I will admit that the last statement was a bit sarcastic – but other than that the remainder is absolutely correct and irrefutable, if worded bluntly at times.
Every single thing I wrote is specific and accurate, and completely demolishes the assumptions you made.
If you wanted a debate, that was certainly the time to react accordingly, to mitigate your position, or to accept that perhaps you had been mistaken in your assumptions and judgement in the matter.
Missunderstandings do occur – and this was your opportunity to defuse the situation.
Instead you stuck your foot in it Ymarsakar, and you know it.
Instead of admitting that you did not know enough prior to expressing an opinion – which is not something to be so defensive about, or even admitting the possibility that you were in error – you responded quite aggressively.
You cling tenaciously to the position you staked out regardless of facts that could allow you to change your position.
There’s a saying that when the facts are on your side, you argue the facts. When they aren’t, you attack the other side.
While I have already admitted the last statement I made was a bit sarcastic, I was actually holding back at that point and providing you plenty of opportunity to back down or modify your position. I even provided plenty of information that would justify modifying your position.
Considering all that you’d posted by that point, I feel I’ve exercised considerable restraint in the matter actually.
You chose not to.
—-
Instead, you toss out an accusation of neurotic behaviour.
That would count as an attack.
—-
You toss out “psychological angst”.
That would be another attack.
—-
You accuse me of rude behaviour? You describe me as acting “contemptable”?
Hypocrisy – yeah, I said it.
—-
You talk of adult responsibilities, yet you created this mess and now seek to project the blame onto me?
Very childlike indeed.
—-
Accusing me of lying – even after I specifically gave you the benefit of the doubt in the matter?
Another attack.
—-
Accusation of harassment?
Projecting again.
—-
Accusation of rude – well, there was that last paragraph as I admitted, but nothing on the order of the BS you were shoveling out by the truckload.
At any rate, another attack.
—-
Accusation of narcissism? Simply because I called you on your BS?
Another attack.
—-
Behaving like “an attack dog”?
Another attack?
—-
Accusations of “hurt feelings”? Right…just another way of attacking my response instead of responding constructively to what I said.
Was that yet more projection?
Are your feelings hurt?
—-
Accusations regarding my “ego”?
Attack again…
—-
This statement by you is truely rich:
“But we can’t all be adults that abide by common standards of decency and courtesy, now can we.”
You are clearly making an example of yourself here as it’s just as clear you have no intention of abiding by any such standards – especially in light of all of the attacks you lobbed instead of responding more appropriately – and more maturely.
—-
Then there’s this statement at the end of that specific post:
“You want to take your ball home and declare “victory”, go right ahead. I don’t really give a damn….”
YET – you come right back again immediately afterwards and post again long before I even realized this conversation was still going.
Quite fixated all of a sudden, aren’t you?
Now a few Ymarsakar threats:
“if you keep pressing me, Scottie, I assure you, I will very clearly outline what your problems are and not from a defensive curled up manner.”
And another threat here:
“But if you keep pushing it, I cannot guarantee that I won’t make this personal myself.”
And finally this:
“You can apologize, you can retract your statements by saying they were excessive, or you can go away. Or you can continue to harass me, but I have given you fair warning and that is the best I can do at this time to give you a reason to change your current behavior.”
I have not chosen to harass you – you interjected yourself in a very negative manner into the conversation.
Now your own ego – that which you accused me of having a problem on – is moving you to demand that I apologize?
You demand that I retract my statements, which you have yet to address directly while at the same time claiming I wanted no real “debate”?
“Go away” – gee, I thought this was neo’s site. Talk about an ego.
Claim more harassment of you by me – have you actually read what you wrote?
So let’s see, you’re exhibiting a complete inability to admit error on your own part, yet DEMANDING that others conform to your own expectations of reality?
You’re exhibiting a hyperdefensive response at every turn while refusing to respond to what was actually said.
You’re tossing out derogatory remarks at every turn as a means of attacking me instead of responding to valid points.
You’re exhibiting an almost mindless aggressiveness in how many threats you’re tossing out so haphazardly.
Perhaps you should read the definition of neurosis once more?
I’ll even quote your own words for you:
“characterized by excessive anxiety or insecurity without evidence of neurologic or other organic disease, sometimes accompanied by defensive or immature behaviors…”
Yep, that about covers how you’ve conducted yourself in this matter.
[NOTE: I apologize to neo and other readers who have been viewing this exchange and were offended.
It certainly is not what I had intended when I made my original statements in the conversation, and it’s clearly gotten out of hand, but I also cannot stand the smell of BS – especially when clearly directed at me.
So all can take the comments for what they’re worth.
And again, to our host neo, my apologies.]