Cats
 

Felines have probably been living alongside of man longer than canines. Yet, the common house cat remains remarkably feral. They are aloof and have retained their natural instincts much more so it seems, than dogs have. Most dogs that are pets have become so tamed, they probably wouldn't survive for long in the wild. Yet, most cats would probably do just fine.

Why is that? Are their natural/wild instincts more firmly embedded in their DNA?

Re: Cats
 

maybe part of it is that dogs are pack animals and cats are more secretive.

Re: Cats
 

Or cats never stumbled upon the strategy of sucking up to humans, or they managed to do just fine without it.

Re: Cats
 

[ QUOTE ]
maybe part of it is that dogs are pack animals and cats are more secretive.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought of this, but don't some felines live in prides? And aren't some wolves solitary? This could be it, but I'd guess intelligence, before packs.

Re: Cats
 

[ QUOTE ]
Or cats never stumbled upon the strategy of sucking up to humans, or they managed to do just fine without it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, the relationship between humans and cats is interesting. We originally kept cats around, because they killed mice and other varmints that sabotaged stored food supplies, etc. In return, cats got the easy life. To this day, it could be said that cats reap more from their relationship with us, than we do from them. Maybe they aren't so dumb after all?

Re: Cats
 

The aloofness of cats vs. the friendliness of dogs definitely has to do with hunting in a pack. Dogs have learned to communicate and rely on each other much more than cats have.

I disagree entirely that cats have "maintained their instincts" better than dogs. Dogs just also have the instinct of loyal respect for the hierarchy of the pack. So if the leader of the pack keeps molding their behavior to be that of a lovable 21st century pet, then that's how the dog will behave.

But humans tolerate the instincts of cats because they don't bother us, so their behavior goes uncorrected. Cats don't have the great ability to adapt that dogs do. People keep cats as pets because the way they naturally live around us is un-intrusive; people keep dogs as pets because their natural temperament is one that is able to adapt to new surroundings, attitudes, and routines. Both species are acting "as they should."

[ QUOTE ]
I thought of this, but don't some felines live in prides? And aren't some wolves solitary?

[/ QUOTE ]

Lions live in prides. But they don't hunt with as much detailed communication and cooperation as wolves do. The females do the hunting, and when they hunt, cooperation is more 'helpful' than 'necessary'. A lion will not die if his communication fails him. With wolves, the prey is often larger, the environment is different and probably more challenging, and wolves aren't as strong as lions, so it's impossible for them to survive without coordinated teamwork.

A lion's pride usually has just a few males, so that means the other males are nomads and have proven themselves to be able to hunt alone over their evolutionary journey.

Male cheetahs also sometimes hunt with their brothers. But some don't. And females hunt alone. So again, some capacity for communication (which pet cats definitely seem to have, just much less than dogs) might creep into the gene pool, but since the animal is mostly equipped to survive even in the absence of communication, the effect isn't anything like dogs.

I don't know about wolves living solitary lives. If what you think you heard is correct, my guess is they're just anomalies, whereas all cats are pretty well able to survive on their own. Some have just found that living together is a little better. Wolves really aren't equipped to live alone, and I'm sure the ones that do do not do so voluntarily, and will not be reproducing much.

Re: Cats
 

[ QUOTE ]
Felines have probably been living alongside of man longer than canines. Yet, the common house cat remains remarkably feral. They are aloof and have retained their natural instincts much more so it seems, than dogs have. Most dogs that are pets have become so tamed, they probably wouldn't survive for long in the wild. Yet, most cats would probably do just fine.

Why is that? Are their natural/wild instincts more firmly embedded in their DNA?

[/ QUOTE ]
It may be dogs that are the mystery.

The wide range of dogs are all one species and apparantly its very unusual for one species to be so diveerse and so breedable for desired traits including tameness.

cats are far more regular.

chez

Re: Cats
 

I think there was a study done a while back and dogs are more intelligent than cats. Don't anthropomorphize cats and dogs too much, it's not like work dogs get pissed at their boss for making them work all day when what they really want to do is go fishing.

Re: Cats
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think there was a study done a while back and dogs are more intelligent than cats. Don't anthropomorphize cats and dogs too much, it's not like work dogs get pissed at their boss for making them work all day when what they really want to do is go fishing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think of cats as Lizards with fur.

luckyme

Re: Cats
 

Thanks ALaw. Very informative. I thought some lions were in fact capable of a little more sophisticated approach to hunting, but I could be wrong about it. I thought I've seen documentaries that showed how one lion would flush out prey while others laid in wait, etc.

I can't cite exactly where I heard about solitary wolves, but I'm pretty sure some foxes live solitary lives (aren't foxes canines?).

Anyway, what you say makes a lot of sense. Of course, it has to do with dogs respecting the hierarchy of the pack. Although I'm pretty sure male lions wrestle for hiearchy too, I think you're correct that they're more likely to leave the pride and live solitary lives, whereas wolves just accept their demoted status.

Probably this all has to do with intelligence too somehow.