From: srlee@beta.lanl.gov (Stephen R Lee)
Subject: Re: response to rec.pets.dogs FAQ
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Distribution: alt
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 21:40:23 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.184842.20063@odin.corp.sgi.com> amazon@sgi.com (Stormwind) writes:

>> srlee writes:

[stuff deleted]


>>I disagree.  I think the warning is fine the way it is.  They are a bad idea.  
>>Leave the wolves in the wild (or, to be more correct, *return* wolves to the
>>wild, don't place them in backyards).
>
>you miss the point.  the idea here is not to
>"put the wolf in the backyard".  hybrids, like
>a wide number of other dog breeds, are a cross
>between animals.  many people have the misconception
>that crossbreeds will always pick up the worst
>attributes of the more vicious of the two being
>crossbred.  for instance, a pit bull cross bred
>with a golden retriever will be looked askance
>at because it might contain "pit bull temperment".
>this is a common public misconception stemming
>entirely from ignorance.

I was speaking figuritively, of course.  People see "White Fang" and
decide that it would be neat to have a wolf in their backyard.  I am
not talking about "expert WH" owner here.  I am talking about Joe public.
I realize that there is a difference between a WH, a wolf, an Alaskan
Malamute, and a schipperke.  Your next comment indicates that we both 
agree that the general public does not.

>
>far more "incidents" happen because the OWNER
>has screwed up while raising the animal than 
>due to the animal's breed.  hysteria about breeds
>runs rampant through the years: when i was a 
>kid, people thought that dobermans were "man killers"
>and they would turn on their own owners.  several
>years after that, rottweilers were the maligned breed.
>then it was pit bulls, and now we are seeing hybrid
>bashing.  it's public hysteria....irresponsible owners
>stir up the ignorant masses, who then react wildly
>against things that they haven't bothered to find out
>about.

No argument here.  I agree.  I am not objecting because I think wolf hybrids
are vicious killers.  I think they are a bad idea for *other* reasons.


>>>That is one of the main attractions of WHs (as well as Australian shepards and
>>>lots of other "working" dogs). 
>>
>>What?  The larger brain in the wolf?  How is this larger brain and increased
>>intelligence challenged in someones backyard?  It is challenged in the wild.
>
>again, you miss the point.  hybrid owners 
>are interested in more intelligent animals 
>because they are interested in a companion
>rather than bric-a-brac dumb pets.  why 
>choose a dog over a hamster?  dogs are more
>intelligent than hamsters.  why choose a hybrid
>over a dog?  hybrids are more intelligent than
>many dogs.  and from personal experience, 
>hybrids are MORE than capable of thinking up
>stuff to challenge them in the average backyard.

No, I don't think I have missed the point.  You deleted the section in which
I mention the brain size of dogs v.s. wolves.  I will repeat it again.  The
brains in our domesticated dogs are smaller as a result of domestication.  I
felt, and feel, that this is due to the fact that our domesticated dogs do
not have to rely on their wits to survive.  Does that mean that they are "dumber"
than wolves?  I don't know.  How do you define "smart" and "dumb" in another
species?  The point I am trying to make is that the WH might not get to use
this "higher intelligence" in someones backyard.  How can it?  Thinking up
new ways of escaping, perhaps.  We have domesticated the dog and aquired a
variety of breeds that are remarkably good at different things.  Pulling
sleds, retreiving game, and so on.  They certainly cannot survive as well
(some not at all) in the wild without our help, and a WH probably could.
Does that make it more intelligent?  It certainly makes it more intelligent 
*in a different setting*, not mre intelligent "in general", whatever that
means.

[stuff deleted]

>
>>>There are two qualities of the animal that I feel are also important for how
>>>well the animal will fare in a domestic environment.  As you point out, some
>>>WHs are very skittish.  This is a sign of potential problems, since fearful
>>>animals are more likely to become aggressive.  However, my experience has been
>>>that most WHs are NOT nervous.  It is also relatively easy to determine this
>>
>>But all wolves are, by necessity.  
>
>all wolves are what?  nervous?  hardly.
>i use the word "exciteable" rather than "nervous",

I agree.  I was using the original authors words.  Wolves are "exciteable" by
necessity.

[stuff deleted]

>
>>Even though I deleted your section on genetics, I 
>>saw nothing in it that says which wolf traits you are getting and which you are not
>>when you breed.  How do you know?  
>
>you never know what *behavioural* traits you're
>going to get when you breed.  it varies.  many of
>them turn out to be learned behaviour.

This is a problem, then, is'nt it?  How do you know what behavioural characteristics
you will inherit from the wolf when you breed it to a dog?

[stuff deleted]

>>
>>I maintain that wolf hybrids are a bad idea.  I'm not trying to be insulting,
>>it is just how I feel.  Dogs have been domesticated for a long, long time.
>>I fail to see the rationale behind trying to put a wild animal, or some 
>>higher "proportion" of a wild animal in our backyards.  Does'nt this strike
>>anyone as just a little cruel?  
>
>this depends on what's going on.  first off, most
>hybrid owners have no intention of attempting
>to put a "wild" (read: born and raised in the wild)
>animal into their backyards.  most hybrid owners
>are interested in a more intelligent animal than
>one can get with the average dog.  

See the above discussion of "intelligence."

>as far as "cruelty" goes, there's a whole world
>out there.  those who hold that no animal should
>be kept as a pet would consider keeping a hamster
>to be "cruel".  others would consider a neglected
>pet to be "cruel".  the thing to remember is that
>a hybrid is NOT a wolf.  it is a *hybrid*, a mix,
>and has traits of *both* species.

True.  When I said cruel, I was reffering to an intelligence that is used
for survival, hardly a problem in captivity.  I would think that this would
be a bit frustrating, but I am a human, not a wolf.  I think we can all agree
that a neglected animal is one that has been treated in a cruel manner.

Indeed, the hybrid has traits of *both* species, but how "much" of which trait?

>
>>Instead of this, why not help out the many
>>efforts around the country that are trying to re-introduce the wolf into
>>the wild?  There are several attempts underway right now, the mexican wolf
>>to Big Bend and the grey wolf to Yellowstone are just a couple efforts that
>>spring to mind.  The public has a very narrow minded view of wolves, and
>>*every time* a wolf-hybrid injures someone, it sets back wolf re-introduction
>>efforts, because it re-inforces the public's negative images of wolves.  
>
>one reason for this is that the general public
>has this very nasty habit of, again, fixating
>on the mistaken impression that the animal
>is "bad" because it has "bad blood", in this case,
>because it is "a wolf".  

My point *exactly*.

>
>>In
>>addition, the public cannot tell the difference between a WH and an Alaskan
>>Malamute or a Siberian Husky or a few other dogs, and as incidents between
>>WH and humans rise (and I guarantee they will), they have a negative impact on 
>>these breeds as well.  
>
>so, which breeds shall we now outlaw?  i
>suggest instead that rather than breeding
>MORE stupidity by restricting or outlawing
>types of animals, that the public be EDUCATED.

Breeding more stupidity?  I can't take an engine apart and put one back together
again.  Does that make me less intelligent than my mechanic?  My mechanic does
not understand quantum mechanics.  Does that make me smarter than my mechanic?
No, in both cases, or a yes, when phrased "my mechanic is smarter than I am 
when it comes to engines."  Will a wolf hybrid herd sheep?  Retreive game?
Will a cat?  Therefore, I suppose if you want an animal that would be very good
at fending for itself and surviving in the wild, then a WH is for you.  If you
want an animal that is very intelligent when "calculating" exactly where the
ball will touch down so he/she can run under it and catch it, then get a retriever.

I think you have missed my point.  I am not suggesting that WH be outlawed.  I am
saying that I think they are a bad idea, and I would hope that others will
weigh the evidence before making a decision and decide against owning one.  I
still think it is a matter of personal choice.  My remarks imply that
       1. They hurt the public's perception of wild wolves
       2. The can tarnish the reputation of some very fine working dogs
I would much rather see wild wolves back in Yellowstone than diluted wolves in
someones backyard.  That is my opinion.  No flames, no insults, just an 
opinion.

[stuff deleted]

>				stormwind
>
>				hell's amazon

-- 
============================================================
Stephen R. Lee                 | 
OooWoo Racing Kennel           | I'd rather be driving sled
E-Mail: srlee@beta.lanl.gov    | dogs.
Newsgroups: alt.wolves