EXISTENTIAL BEHAVIOR OF A DOG

Authors

  • Ezgi Ergen Graduate Education Institute, Istanbul University-Cerrahpasa,Istanbul
  • Ibrahim Akyazı Department of Physiology, Istanbul University-Cerrahpasa, Veterinary Faculty, Istanbul

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37000/abbsl.2023.106.17

Keywords:

behavior, LGD, guarding, attachment, livestock, dog

Abstract

Livestock guarding dogs (LGD) are selected according to their behavioral characteristics and performances rather than their morphological characteristics. In order to be able to protect the livestock, the dog must have certain behavioral patterns. These guarding behaviors are largely instinctive and require relatively little training other than timely correction of undesirable behaviors. The basis of the LGD guarding behavior is their strong attachment to the sheep, and their success is the result of a qualified genetic background consolidated by proper breeding. Artificial selection, which they have been exposed for thousands of years, has put pressure on their predatory motor patterns. Suppression of genetic sequences has blurred the congener recognition, enabling them to develop social patterns across species. Therefore livestock guarding dogs tend to perceive sheep as dogs and accept them into their herds under appropriate breeding methods. Such attachment enables livestock guarding dogs to protect sheep against external threats without human manipulation. In this context, dogs without the right genes cannot be trained to be successful guardians regardless of the breeding method. Livestock guarding dogs are selected for displaying non-threatening submissive behaviors towards the livestock. It is necessary that the LGD, which accepts the sheep as the same species, should not have predatoy behaviors towards them. Under proper breeding conditions, the LGD is expected to attach, follow and stay with the livestock he is guarding. The working methods of livestock guarding dogs are not based on hunting predators; livestock protection is usually a preventive defense without physical contact between the LGD and the predator. An attentive LGD should withdraw to the livestock when threatened and stay with the sheep. A properly bred LGD with the right genes does not leave the livestock when threatened; it barks loudly and increases the odor signals by urinating. As a result of such threatening social responses, the predator's hunting behavior may be impaired or the predator may be discouraged from attacking the livestock. Protective behaviors are difficult to observe because livestock guarding dogs only become protective in the presence of a threat, whereas trustworthy and attentive behaviors can be consistently seen when the LGD is in the vicinity of the livestock. Guarding also depends on the dog's aggressive temperament, the species and number of predators, the size of the livestock, and the number of livestock guarding dogs. However, the presence of attentiveness deficiency in the dog will be reflected in the dog's protective behavior.

References

Larson, G., Karlsson, E. K., Perri, A., Webster, M. T., Ho, S. Y., Peters, J., ... & Lindblad-Toh, K. (2012). Rethinking dog domestication by integrating genetics, archeology, and biogeography. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(23), 8878-8883.

Coppinger: predatory motor pattern : Coppinger, R., & Schneider, R. (1995). Evolution of working dogs. In Serpell, J (Ed.). The domestic dog: Its evolution, behaviour and interactions with people (pp 21-47). University Press, Cambridge

Gehring, T. M., VerCauteren, K. C., & Landry, J. M. (2010). Livestock protection dogs in the 21st century: is an ancient tool relevant to modern conservation challenges?. BioScience, 60(4), 299-308.

Livestock guardian dog. (2022, January 11). In Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Livestock_guardian_dog

VerCauteren, K. C., Lavelle, M. J., Gehring, T. M., & Landry, J. M. (2012). Cow dogs: use of livestock protection dogs for reducing predation and transmission of pathogens from wildlife to cattle. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 140(3-4), 128-136.

Kinka, D., & Young, J. K. (2019). Evaluating domestic sheep survival with different breeds of livestock guardian dogs. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 72(6), 923-932.

Andelt, W. F. (2004). Use of livestock guarding animals to reduce predation on livestock. Sheep & Goat Research Journal, 3.

Ambarlı, H. (2019). Analysis of wolf–human conflicts: Implications for damage mitigation measures. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 65(6), 1-9.

Potgieter, G. C., Kerley, G. I., & Marker, L. L. (2016). More bark than bite? The role of livestock guarding dogs in predator control on Namibian farmlands. Oryx, 50(3), 514-522.

Rigg, R. (2001). Livestock guarding dogs: their current use world wide (Vol. 1). Oxford: Canid Specialist Group.

Coppinger, R., Coppinger, L., Langeloh, G., Gettler, L., & Lorenz, J. (1988, March). A decade of use of livestock guarding dogs. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Vertebrate Pest Conference (1988) (p. 43).

Spencer, K., Sambrook, M., Bremner-Harrison, S., Cilliers, D., Yarnell, R. W., Brummer, R., & Whitehouse-Tedd, K. (2020). Livestock guarding dogs enable human-carnivore coexistence: First evidence of equivalent carnivore occupancy on guarded and unguarded farms. Biological Conservation, 241, 108256.

Moreira-Arce, D., Ugarte, C. S., Zorondo-Rodríguez, F., & Simonetti, J. A. (2018). Management tools to reduce carnivore-livestock conflicts: current gap and future challenges. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 71(3), 389-394.

Rust, N. A., Whitehouse‐Tedd, K. M., & MacMillan, D. C. (2013). Perceived efficacy of livestock‐guarding dogs in South Africa: implications for cheetah conservation. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 37(4), 690-697.

Smith, B. P., & Appleby, R. G. (2018). Promoting human–dingo co-existence in Australia: moving towards more innovative methods of protecting livestock rather than killing dingoes (Canis dingo). Wildlife Research, 45(1), 1-15.

Kinka, D., & Young, J. K. (2019). The tail wagging the dog: positive attitude towards livestock guarding dogs do not mitigate pastoralists’ opinions of wolves or grizzly bears. Palgrave Communications, 5(1), 1-9.

Turcsán, B., Kubinyi, E., & Miklósi, Á. (2011). Trainability and boldness traits differ between dog breed clusters based on conventional breed categories and genetic relatedness. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 132(1-2), 61-70.

Green, J. S., & Woodruff, R. A. (1988). Breed comparisons and characteristics of use of livestock guarding dogs. Rangeland Ecology & Management/Journal of Range Management Archives, 41(3), 249-251.

Stone, H. R., McGreevy, P. D., Starling, M. J., & Forkman, B. (2016). Associations between domestic-dog morphology and behaviour scores in the dog mentality assessment. PloS one, 11(2), e0149403.

Coppinger, R., & Coppinger, L. (2001). Dogs: A startling new understanding of canine origin, behavior & evolution (pp 101-117). Simon and Schuster.

Hansen, I., Staaland, T., & Ringsø, A. (2002). Patrolling with livestock guard dogs: a potential method to reduce predation on sheep. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A-Animal Science, 52(1), 43-48.

Hansen, I., & Bakken, M. (1999). Livestock-guarding dogs in Norway. 1. Interactions. Rangeland Ecology & Management/Journal of Range Management Archives, 52(1), 2-6.

Green, J. S., Woodruff, R. A., & Andelt, W. F. (1994). Do livestock guarding dogs lose their effectiveness over time?.

Vos, J. (2000). Food habits and livestock depredation of two Iberian wolf packs (Canis lupus signatus) in the north of Portugal. Journal of zoology, 251(4), 457-462.

Hall, N. J., Johnston, A. M., Bray, E. E., Otto, C. M., MacLean, E. L., & Udell, M. A. (2021). Working dog training for the twenty-first century. Frontiers in Veterinary Science, 834.

Slabbert, J. M., & Rasa, O. A. E. (1997). Observational learning of an acquired maternal behaviour pattern by working dog pups: an alternative training method?. Applied Animal Behaviour Science, 53(4), 309-316.

Green, J. S., & Woodruff, R. A. (1990). ADC guarding dog program update: a focus on managing dogs.

Howell, T. J., King, T., & Bennett, P. C. (2015). Puppy parties and beyond: the role of early age socialization practices on adult dog behavior. Veterinary Medicine: Research and Reports, 6, 143.

Marion, M., Béata, C., Sarcey, G., Delfante, S., & Marlois, N. (2018). Study of aggressiveness in livestock-guarding dogs based on rearing method. Journal of Veterinary Behavior, 25, 14-16.

Lorenz, J. R., & Coppinger, L. (1996). Raising and training a livestock-guarding dog. Oregon State University, Extension Service.

Kinka, D., & Young, J. K. (2018). A livestock guardian dog by any other name: similar response to wolves across livestock guardian dog breeds. Rangeland Ecology & Management, 71(4), 509-517.

Potgieter, G. C., Marker, L. L., Avenant, N. L., & Kerley, G. I. (2013). Why Namibian farmers are satisfied with the performance of their livestock guarding dogs. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 18(6), 403-415.

Smith, M. E., Linnell, J. D., Odden, J., & Swenson, J. E. (2000). Review of methods to reduce livestock depradation: I. Guardian animals. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A-Animal Science, 50(4), 279-290.

Published

2023-05-09

How to Cite

Ерген, Е., & Акязи, І. . (2023). EXISTENTIAL BEHAVIOR OF A DOG. Agrarian Bulletin of the Black Sea Littoral, (106). https://doi.org/10.37000/abbsl.2023.106.17