6 ms·

This is probably a highdea, but what if coyotes are having a tough time in the wild and they are smart enough to see how we treat dogs, so they are actually doi

This is probably a highdea, but what if coyotes are having a tough time in the wild and they are smart enough to see how we treat dogs, so they are actually doing what wolves did thousands of years ago by slowly, cautiously edging their way into human society in hopes that they can integrate with us? They aren't particularly hostile, they seem to just want to survive. There have been maybe a couple hundred reported coyote attacks in the past 50 years[0] compared to millions of dog-related attacks per year[1]. Of course, one would expect dog-related attacks to be more common because they interact with us more, so it's not quite a controlled comparison. Why hate on coyotes? I guess it boils to how cute they are, unfortunately. I don't think we truly need them, and they aren't cute enough to keep around for most people. Perhaps if I raised a baby coyote, I would be very inclined to keep one as a pet. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote_attacks_on_humans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote_attacks_on_humans [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_dog_attacks_in_the_Unite...

ItsMe000001 8y ago
> in hopes that they can integrate with us I think you can stop right there. The dog thing happened not because dog "wanted" to be with humans. Dogs were clueless about what happened, it just did. The explanation is on a higher level, not in their desires, not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication (even if some of them may have thought about it, but by then it was already happening).
- collyw 8y ago
  Selective quoting, you missed out the part where he said: "are having a tough time in the wild and they are smart enough to see how we treat dogs". Its a hypothesis and it doesn't seem unreasonable.
  - ItsMe000001 8y ago
    How exactly do they "see how we treat dogs"? I must admit I don't see a "reasonable" hypothesis at all. > Selective quoting, Yes - because that statement does not make sense regardless of context, so I didn't quote the rest. It also saves space. I always only quote the part that I respond to, the rest of the context always still is right there in an Internet forum, unless OP deletes the post. If I quoted in a different place, for example I quote someone in my own blog post, copying from another website, then I would have to provide the context.
- tzahola 8y ago
  >not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication [citation needed]
  - ItsMe000001 8y ago
    If you want to claim they caught wild wolves and started a breeding program like what was done with the famous Russian foxes then it is you need to bring a citation. The outrageous claim that needs citations is that the wolves had "hopes that they can integrate with us".
- golergka 8y ago
  How can you talk about these things with such a high degree of certainty? I've read different theories about dog domestication. All of them have some strong and some weak points. All of them don't have enough evidence to be taken as the only source of truth.
  - ItsMe000001 8y ago
    > How can you talk about these things with such a high degree of certainty? Because "in hopes that they can integrate with us" is just silly. Of course, I admit that I take for granted that I don't have to justify a believe in evolution. If you entertain the possibility it was a deliberate human act it would have required an effort like the Fox breeding experiment in Russia. They would have had to go out and catch wild wolves and breed them for generations - that seems extremely far-fetched. Much more likely that there already were wolves that had gotten used to humans, which means they had already changed. Which is what I said: > even if some of them may have thought about it, but by then it was already happening It sure is likely that humans at some point thought it useful, but the domestication started not because anybody in particular wanted it to happen. By the way, I think horse domestication is (was) probably different. It's easy to see how wolves benefit from leftovers found near humans, but horses just need grass. Horses also still don't depend on humans nearly as much as dogs do.
- salvar 8y ago
  Can you source any of your statements about what precisely happened and who desired what thousands of years ago?
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    Because you think the dogs had a long term plan?
    - salvar 8y ago
      > not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication Did you read the full text or just immediately jump to the snarky burn attempt?
      - ItsMe000001 8y ago
        The statement that requires proof is the one that dog evolution was caused by desires of any one in particular, especially "hopes to integrate with us" of wolves.
        salvar 8y ago
        > not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication (even if some of them may have thought about it, but by then it was already happening). Again: Can you support this claim with anything? I'm actually curious, and you seem evasive.
        ItsMe000001 8y ago
        Huh? Again: Proof has to be provided by the one making the extraordinary claims. The statement that requires proof is the one that dog evolution was caused by desires of any one in particular, especially "hopes to integrate with us" of wolves. That statement was made by anonytrary, not by me.
        8y ago
dzdt 8y ago
No! Thats a major point in the article. Coyotes don't meta-game. Trying to get your great-grand-cubs domesticated would be a meta-game strategy. Coyotes are masters of the scheming mini-game.
- make3 8y ago
  does any individual animal other than humans meta game? I'd be surprised if even chimps had long term deceptive overarching strategies
  - Raidion 8y ago
    I think another point of the article is that even though we humans meta-game, we probably aren't meta-gaming at a high enough level and that might give the human species trouble at some point in the future. You could even argue that it's already happening with our fairly casual destruction of the environment, overfishing, over use of certain crops, etc.
    - a1369209993 8y ago
      We actually were meta-gaming at a high enough level: rush through the tech tree with massive resource expenditures and no concern for the side effects, then curbstomp all our problems with nanotech and space travel/megastructures. The problem is we stopped.
- ngvrnd 8y ago
  It may be a major point of the article, but that doesn't mean it's correct, or that the remark about coyotes trying to be domesticated is necessarily wrong. Doesn't mean it's right, either, by the way.
megaman22 8y ago
Coyotes really aren't having a tough time in the wild at all. They are thriving. With the demise of wolf populations, they've started taking on apex predator roles, but are still incredibly adaptable. They have no real predators, and the margins in trapping and hunting them has gone down as fur is less popular and fewer areas pay bounties on them. I know a few people that hunt them, but it's just because they want to keep the coyotes from preying on the deer herd. So that they can prey on the deer herd themselves.

ItsMe000001 8y ago

> in hopes that they can integrate with us I think you can stop right there. The dog thing happened not because dog "wanted" to be with humans. Dogs were clueless about what happened, it just did. The explanation is on a higher level, not in their desires, not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication (even if some of them may have thought about it, but by then it was already happening).

collyw 8y ago
Selective quoting, you missed out the part where he said: "are having a tough time in the wild and they are smart enough to see how we treat dogs". Its a hypothesis and it doesn't seem unreasonable.
- ItsMe000001 8y ago
  How exactly do they "see how we treat dogs"? I must admit I don't see a "reasonable" hypothesis at all. > Selective quoting, Yes - because that statement does not make sense regardless of context, so I didn't quote the rest. It also saves space. I always only quote the part that I respond to, the rest of the context always still is right there in an Internet forum, unless OP deletes the post. If I quoted in a different place, for example I quote someone in my own blog post, copying from another website, then I would have to provide the context.
tzahola 8y ago
>not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication [citation needed]
- ItsMe000001 8y ago
  If you want to claim they caught wild wolves and started a breeding program like what was done with the famous Russian foxes then it is you need to bring a citation. The outrageous claim that needs citations is that the wolves had "hopes that they can integrate with us".
golergka 8y ago
How can you talk about these things with such a high degree of certainty? I've read different theories about dog domestication. All of them have some strong and some weak points. All of them don't have enough evidence to be taken as the only source of truth.
- ItsMe000001 8y ago
  > How can you talk about these things with such a high degree of certainty? Because "in hopes that they can integrate with us" is just silly. Of course, I admit that I take for granted that I don't have to justify a believe in evolution. If you entertain the possibility it was a deliberate human act it would have required an effort like the Fox breeding experiment in Russia. They would have had to go out and catch wild wolves and breed them for generations - that seems extremely far-fetched. Much more likely that there already were wolves that had gotten used to humans, which means they had already changed. Which is what I said: > even if some of them may have thought about it, but by then it was already happening It sure is likely that humans at some point thought it useful, but the domestication started not because anybody in particular wanted it to happen. By the way, I think horse domestication is (was) probably different. It's easy to see how wolves benefit from leftovers found near humans, but horses just need grass. Horses also still don't depend on humans nearly as much as dogs do.
salvar 8y ago
Can you source any of your statements about what precisely happened and who desired what thousands of years ago?
- pbhjpbhj 8y ago
  Because you think the dogs had a long term plan?
  - salvar 8y ago
    > not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication Did you read the full text or just immediately jump to the snarky burn attempt?
    - ItsMe000001 8y ago
      The statement that requires proof is the one that dog evolution was caused by desires of any one in particular, especially "hopes to integrate with us" of wolves.
      - salvar 8y ago
        > not even in the desires of the humans who participated in most of the dog domestication (even if some of them may have thought about it, but by then it was already happening). Again: Can you support this claim with anything? I'm actually curious, and you seem evasive.
        ItsMe000001 8y ago
        Huh? Again: Proof has to be provided by the one making the extraordinary claims. The statement that requires proof is the one that dog evolution was caused by desires of any one in particular, especially "hopes to integrate with us" of wolves. That statement was made by anonytrary, not by me.
        8y ago

dzdt 8y ago

No! Thats a major point in the article. Coyotes don't meta-game. Trying to get your great-grand-cubs domesticated would be a meta-game strategy. Coyotes are masters of the scheming mini-game.

make3 8y ago
does any individual animal other than humans meta game? I'd be surprised if even chimps had long term deceptive overarching strategies
- Raidion 8y ago
  I think another point of the article is that even though we humans meta-game, we probably aren't meta-gaming at a high enough level and that might give the human species trouble at some point in the future. You could even argue that it's already happening with our fairly casual destruction of the environment, overfishing, over use of certain crops, etc.
  - a1369209993 8y ago
    We actually were meta-gaming at a high enough level: rush through the tech tree with massive resource expenditures and no concern for the side effects, then curbstomp all our problems with nanotech and space travel/megastructures. The problem is we stopped.
ngvrnd 8y ago
It may be a major point of the article, but that doesn't mean it's correct, or that the remark about coyotes trying to be domesticated is necessarily wrong. Doesn't mean it's right, either, by the way.

megaman22 8y ago

Coyotes really aren't having a tough time in the wild at all. They are thriving. With the demise of wolf populations, they've started taking on apex predator roles, but are still incredibly adaptable. They have no real predators, and the margins in trapping and hunting them has gone down as fur is less popular and fewer areas pay bounties on them. I know a few people that hunt them, but it's just because they want to keep the coyotes from preying on the deer herd. So that they can prey on the deer herd themselves.