# Does your dog behave a little different...?



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

Well these ones following could match yours and need some extra care, after all, we've all picked up abandoned strays and kept them, haven't we, its an understandable stress to find the ones sitting in your car that can bend iron bars with their teeth after a jolly picnic. All completely natural.
And to prove it to you...
Ananova - Pet dog was a wolf

Recently i have created a forum for wild dogs all the way across 
the range to wolf-dog hybrids as pets.
World Wild Dogs (Canidae) Forum - Index

I myself once kept a Dingo(Australian Wolf).
The main problem these animals could be having is no information hub, 
and too broken down into specific sites.
The policy is to encourage information exchange anywhere around the 
globe at any level from scientist down to personal wild dog pet keepers.
Nicephotogs Free PHP tutorial nicephot.xlphp.net www.nicephotog-jvm.net
then write the address(edit) into the browser address bar like below
http://www.nicephot.xlphp.net/Dingone.pdf

If you want to own a Dingo and help prevent their extinction , like the Ethiopian Wolfs.
These blokes do not approve of my preservation technique either , but i've never found so much writ all over the internet of people who do but don't say!!!
http://www.dingodiscovery.net/owning.html


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

i dont think these animals should be bred for "pets" & i dont think Wolves,Foxes,Dingo's should be taken from the wild, i think there should be strict legislation in certain parts of the world where keeping them is common, sanctuarys are over flowing with hybrids its a very sad situation


----------



## Fleur (Jul 19, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> i dont think these animals should be bred for "pets" & i dont think Wolves,Foxes,Dingo's should be taken from the wild, i think there should be strict legislation in certain parts of the world where keeping them is common, sanctuarys are over flowing with hybrids its a very sad situation


Great point - Keeping wild animals as pets is not something I could ever advocate.


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

..."i dont think these animals should be bred for "pets" & i dont think Wolves,Foxes,Dingo's should be taken
from the wild"...(end quotation)

*The beyond 2000 Thylacine keepers modern practices* (I thought i'd give this article a name)

*While to personally "KEEP", is a pet, pet does not imply allowance of negligence is accepted.*
*Pet implies relationship*

*If you read below, i think you will find you will have ......(may be the only polite way of indicating it
to you effectively for its weight of the point missed) upon yourselves at totally missing a piece of a
problem that is definitely always present in conservation and care of anything physically actual.*

_*Ignorance , misjudgement and failure are not virtues whether anyone tried or not.*_

See the video link later in this, confidence in handling a canid with no gloves while its being dangerous
may have been able to have been done sensibly simply by a judgement of its character over a short 10
minute test period if the people wanted to help it, because it probably only required ***scruff grabbing
directly behind the head and careful attention to how far to move it each move until and whatever neared
it to unsettled distress again.
_( ***Is at the absolute base behind the skull and with whatever skin can be gathered "jined over/on the back of the head"
that lifts with a little also of the neck skin cover ) ._
If people expect they can be safe and enjoy camping trips such as on Fraser Island, Queensland, Australia,
among the Dingos, then they need to realise what they are doing at face value because of ignorance to their
surrounding when "able to physically contact wildlife" whether allowed to directly interact or not.

Occupational Health and Safety

Take a look at the video following this paragraph, and this type of total stupidity and endangerment that 
occurs from not knowing enough at least and not experiencing the actual, the same as practical instruction
is given in any College school or university. Its not about trying to get someone to know what you could
have done sensibly and safely. 
Its about having enough people at all times (e.g. during war, recession, drought etc) to be proficient at
handling and keeping. 
A problem (required inexerable) bi-product of this is called taming, because a requirement to have cooperative
creatures in enough numbers (that are operating at a base level of their own species' instinct and social 
predjudices inbuilt attained from their natural actual environment) that behave as their wild counterparts
do and so will not derogate the required handling and communication signals used inter species(between 
humans and wolves e.t.c.) that mainly belong to the wolves. The reason for taming is to build a bond between
the tamer and the animal so the animal will be able to survive the transfer from natural circumastance(Its
not an issue that captured wolves die during scientific study , the same its no mystery some of them survive
if they have the same animal handler present always for that section of the building).

Injured wild wolf attacks man!
YouTube - Injured wild wolf attacks man!

If you want to preserve these animals and decide to care, you get a scientist to learn everything about them
so they can document it. 
However, even with a mobile phone , sattelites and computers, you will not be able to apply that information
or extrapolatively translate it from text into practical actions of sensible sequences of signals and also
commit judgement levels of the reactive psychology of the animal even if it were available to put that
information to practice.

How much non ignorance is enough non ignorance as experience at handling.
How many keepers do you need. How much does it cost. Governments pay money for primary production for the GDP
and to kill some of these animals. To date, the only thing American wolves have had helping them has often been
the fur trade, at least when trappers are bothered with what they will not be getting it surfaces the problem.
*For a miriad of safety reasons it requires to, shut up ,and just do it, personally keep.*

Truthfully, governments like the Ethiopian government, like the Australian government will all pay money to kill
these creatures inside the forest boundaries not simply after traversion. Until ecology danger from population
loss is met as a problem or (e.g. if Idi Amin were still in power) governments were to get a black face from their
callous actions of neglect of the environment.

The terrible truth here is that to do any of this for any of them at an assured level is knowing enough people
have no problem with them because they are existent because thay are understood and a focus of a carer.

You cannot expect the economics of taxation and numbers of kept animals to be effective as consevation or
preservation.
Account for economic cost, then account for actual real life physical process of economics, spending taxing,
primary production seasonal results e.t.c.

Its always the same, alike governments, people are prepared to look on something and say thats horrible, but
they are not prepared to actually work at that itself physically.
It requires DNA testing sires and dams and their offspring too, to be sure they are actaul wolves.

I don't want to hear some people saying they can or have beaten governments or primary producers or anything
else that is a perpetual economic poverty.
If you knew how economics is secured by force you could be extincting the creature faster to have even uttered
something for it.

*"Wild" Animal...*
I cannot say that fully is worth anything more than an after-shave commercials' invigorational representations.
Look _at the statistics of the deaths by your so called "domestic" dogs_ and who then cares when _the primary psychologically evolved drive_ is that _for_ a carnivore in either.

_I have never said a pack of kelpies were not domestic dogs(or that she looked like an old dingo to me), but neither will i say that they are less dangerous or not dangerous requiring caution when as a work dog pack with hierarchy._


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

not really sure what youre saying you think its ok to breed hybrids & keep wild canids as pets right??

im for educatng people about these animals i agree theres so much ignorance, but i prefer the likes of Jim Dutcher who's studies & "friendship" of Wolves were invaluable, not some Joe Public who probably want one of these animals cos they see then as some sort of status symbol & have them living in an artificial environment, learning nothing about their innate behaviours.

surely you cant believe many of these animals kept as "pets" live happy & fulfilled lives, so many end up in sanctuaries many more destroyed dont you think there should be strict regulations to stop this?

i agree with educating people & preserving canids in the wild, 

i am absolutely devestated about the delisting of the Wolves in the USA, in Idaho alone they are going to wipe out 26 Wolf packs including the pups from the 4th of May but keeping individuals as "pets" isnt the answer to save the species!!!


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

Jesus christ man! check your facts before you rattle that off blind at someone.

..."not some Joe Public who probably want one of these animals cos they see then as some sort of status symbol & have them living in an artificial environment"...
You have no idea where my dingo came from(but i did not write that into the PDF), it came from the pound in an inland Australian agricultural hub(nothing artificial about it) area and was probably as much a joke against me because he was not tame. He required immense reassurance and physical handling knack all the way home.
My first pet i was not allowed to keep was a warragamba Blue Mountains Dingo bitch(outside Penrith NSW) when i was four, i'd see one in the paddock once in a long while.


..."surely you can't believe many of these animals kept as "pets" live happy & fulfilled lives"...
Is that some sort of confession by you, or on the behalf of all pet owners that you have no idea what your doing when you keep a canis familiaris or any other? 
Why accuse me then?

..."dont you think there should be strict regulations to stop this?"...
There are intricate reasons around the world now to learn to keep wolves particularly if possible, more than simply one(noahs ark principle). Yes and No. pre determining Laws against someone keeping are an interesting thought, but do not stack up as rational, particularly when a creature jumps back and forth over the line of endangered and vermin as a legal obligatory classification.
In that forum there is a post that tells you why its not so bad there is no regulation, though the point is subtle in the message, there are serious reasons the apart legal absurdity of animal economic-environment status.

If anything is bad, i hate to say it, but it is if some "d...head" is stopped from keeping them.
All you need to do is look at the pictures tourists do not bring back from the outback of dingos. The world is real, it can easily lack food. Many dingos at periods are emaciated bone bags. If i were dieing, i would want the chance at least to live on or as a tamed dingo a chance to never experience real injuries and starvation.
There are more problems than ever for populations of any wild creature. And their very ability to wild is dwindling and you cannot really save the territorial space as you think you can. So be sensible and leave some of this to any "d...heads" that have money and can keep a pet wolf even on that principal alone, though i strongly suggest how much such animals need to have a properly constantly operating bond with a consistant human carer.



..."4th of May"... 
(and while not checking what you wrote as you didn't read my PDF "yOU DEFINITELY DID NOT" )You mean fourth of July.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

nicephotog said:


> Jesus christ man! check your facts before you rattle that off blind at someone.
> 
> ..."not some Joe Public who probably want one of these animals cos they see then as some sort of status symbol & have them living in an artificial environment"...
> You have no idea where my dingo came from(but i did not write that into the PDF), it came from the pound in an inland Australian agricultural hub(nothing artificial about it) area and was probably as much a joke against me because he was not tame. He required immense reassurance and physical handling knack all the way home.
> ...


why dont you keep it simple then! i think rescuing these animals is fantastic(you do mean you rescued your Dingo, dont you?)

but im totally shocked that you think its ok for d...heads to keep these wonderful animals & you think its "not so bad" there are no regulations! unbelievable!!!

most of them are little more than prisoners! for an animal who should be roaming over vast areas living in social family groups, i cant think of anything more pitiful or cruel!!!

& what the hell are you talking about 4th of July!! i mean what i said 4TH OF MAY!!

oh & just to add do you think its ok to breed hybrids then????, cos i dont think you've said


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

..."oh & just to add do you think its ok to breed hybrids then????, cos i dont think you've said"...

As ecological effect in the wild as the balance of nature through natural selection and actions,
a hybrid is totally undesirable.
With regard to deliberate manipulation of cross breeding, i can about leave the answer to those whom
feel there is both an economic benefit and use from the construction of wolf-dog hybrid.
Australian Cattle Dogs(Heelers) are wolf-dog hybrids, not simply Malamutes, and in the past decade,
new dog breeds constructed from using of wolves genetics have been officially registered worldwide.
From Natures point of view, the only benefit a wolf gets in the wild from hybridisation is the point
of bypassing incestuous genetics, but remains undesirable and less efficient than pure non incest
produced wolves.

..."shocked that you think its ok for d...heads to keep these wonderful animals & you think its
"not so bad" there are no regulations! unbelievable!!!"...

While you do not like the answer, you need to experience temperatures of over 40 degrees celsius
and dehydration and starvation personally yourself as many Dingos in the outback die. But worse
if you get to places such as Blue Mountains in NSW , that can be the very problem inside all those
trees and grass where prey should be plentiful but suffers everything that the Dingos or wolves
around the world suffer.(wondering if you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth because my
previous statement indicates the many cruel problems of life that often are their end since
mankind covered and fenced off all the earth).

As of regulations, those are laws and "unexorably bind people to either innocence or criminal",
that's *no light weight matter to be frivolous of discussion about*.
In Australia and the United Stated there are regultaions, but the relate only to particular
states in either country. Note that many laws are only serviced intricately because of their
taxable usage not because something isolated and specific requires special management.
Note: If wolves are dangerous then by legal governmental rationale for the safety of children we
need not ban them , in sensible law best we exterminate them all.
So i don't know why you would want regulations for something you wouldn't keep.
Think about that.


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

Im confused. Are you saying that we should keep wild animals as pets because life in the wild is tough?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

what abouit the economic load of all the sanctuaries struggling to care for all these hybrids??? the majority of which were bred to make a fast buck(for their own "economic benefits")

Malamutes could have been crossed with wolves centuries ago, but they are pure dogs! the same as my huskies, they are a primitive,ancient breed but they are not wolf/dog hybrids!!!

i said before, rescuing these animals who need help is great but once recovered, where ever possible, they should be returned to the wild.

there are fantastic sanctuarys who really care about saving these species, like the Iberian wolf recovery project for example, in Portugal, the wolves here have acres of natural habitat to roam in, they live in packs & behave normally, this is the way to go, not keeping them on chains or in cages!!!

I have NEVER said Wolves are DANGEROUS!!! i said they should not be kept as pets. But on the other hand crossing them with dogs can produce hybrids which are dangerous, giving the wolf haters more ammunition!! to have the eliminated!!!


oh & i want regulations because i love them & i wouldnt keep a Tiger either!??????????


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

..."where ever possible, they should be returned to the wild."...
http://www.ethiopianwolf.org/
Well you can return your dogs to Alaska as soon as there is a war full of land mines and indiscriminate machine gun fire from day scopes and night IR scopes.
There are only 500 of the Ethiopian wolf alive approx. now.

..."of which were bred to make a fast buck(for their own "economic benefits")"...
Don't blame me i have nothing to do with that, or for fact aim that low to the action(sales and
production supply) i would want a good clean supply to the customer and preferred a way of
knowing the customer were proficient at communicating the animal(and thus, its training).
Animals do not care where they are if it operates for them emotionally and physically!!!!!

..."Malamutes could have been crossed with wolves centuries ago, 
but they are pure dogs! the same as my huskies, they are a 
primitive,ancient breed but they are not wolf/dog hybrids!!!"

The following is a very common quoted story of the Alaskan indians dogs relating the origin of
the Malamute breed(take serious note).
Malamute History
..."Females in heat were sometimes staked out for wolves to breed and the toughness and
adaptability of the Malamute stock was replenished."...

..."I have NEVER said Wolves are DANGEROUS!!!"....
contradictions:
Thats really the only reason they tell people TO NOT DO THAT.

I said people are not prepared to give over there social life to the animal at a strange level
of relationship with it that satisfies many of its problems with a removal from a pack at taming
level as a replacement of same species relationship(heck i never said it was perfect either), but
i did say it is possessed of the same reasons that humans work and hang out together as a group
regardless the species. Food and Protection and emotional comfort.

What you need to see is Dingos in mid 1900's films among the Aboriginal people. They are not the beast of your mind or the people whos only worry is selfish safety legislation. They (any wild dogs) always attempt to hang around primitive humans. If you want a slight flipside, the UK has foxes as studied and witnessed as coming into urban areas to feed on garbage , when in your and most peoples techinality is they are timid of humans and try to keep distance and never be seen.

There are serious reasons, bio mechanical incremental spatial mechanical reasons as much also common directives that finalise Canis Familiaris as being no better(perhaps even only a conjured imaginative self lie) a point of keeping than any top level wolf.
E.G. Tomarctus "means all but a bear", the first dog on the planet paleoarchologically,
Bears weigh around 300kg min standard, dogs are no longer Boriphaginae 3 meters tall, and many other creatures are around a dogs size but do not commit human hunting requirements effectively of that may be nothing to teach an ape.


----------



## goodvic2 (Nov 23, 2008)

This is the most confusing post I have ever read, and due to it;s length, I will not bother. If you have a point to make and want a discussion, then shorten it!

Maybe it's a wind up??????


----------



## reddogsX3 (May 18, 2008)

i'm confused too.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

nicephotog said:


> ..."where ever possible, they should be returned to the wild."...
> Ethiopian Wolf Conservation Programme
> Well you can return your dogs to Alaska as soon as there is a war full of land mines and indiscriminate machine gun fire from day scopes and night IR scopes.
> There are only 500 of the Ethiopian wolf alive approx. now.
> ...


jeez what are you trying to say

I know how many Ethiopean Wolves there are, the charity i support(the Born Free Foundation) are t the forefront in trying to save them from extinction!
& do you know theres not a single one in captivity!!!

i know Mals were crossed with wolves as was my breed but that was years ago they are not hybrids they are pure DOGS!!!

& i know Dingos & Wolves hung around man but they were free to come & go, so whats your point?

my Auntie has a fox that visits her garden regularly, should she put a collar & lead on it?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

ive just had a look at your forum.....

you have a section for hybrids...im just gunna quote it "....this is for people who keep coydogs low wolf content hybrids as pets or any deliberate construction of commercial Wolf dog hybrid for the pet market"

"any deliberate construction of commercial wolf dog hybrids for the pet market"! 

that sounds horrible like your describing some inanimate thing!


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

Before progressing any further, Thankyou for being concerned.

*Warning, the logic is intense, intricate, and not simple.PERIOD.*

..."but they were free to come & go"...
You miss the point every time! Wolves(for main point) use a structured pack hierarchy(not family hierarchy, that slang!) _called ranks_.

In preservation and conservation partial systematic technique(got something disappearing?...then synthetically attempt to help it all you can, After all! you know as an animal_* it cannot help itself ITS TOO COMPLICATED*_)
No Wild animals should simply be removed to either captivity or being a personal posession (its point in my context i am saying SIMPLY is exempt from norm.).
But you best comprehend _SIMPLY that keeping or even personal keeping_ is *a technique of preservation and conservation*, not a straight forward activity of economic production or utilisation(of is only evaluated not enacted in my terms).
I believe *pet* is not a bad problem as its definition does more than imply emotional bond and providence for the pet.

..."& do you know theres not a single one in captivity!!!"...
That's sad, and of the definition of "captivity" please, my Dingo never knew captivity though it was legal to have a keeping license in 1986 and keep it a small area with a 3 meter fence topped by barbed wire for the top 75 cm.
One day when my relatives were away and i lived 8 Kilometers in town i was called by the police whom said they were called by someone in a car that recognised my 4 dogs(my families dogs including the black dingo). They had jumped and climbed out of the pen and were less than a kilometer from where i lived when i reached / met them walking up the road to the highway through town where they had been seen.
A red cattle dog,a small mongrel, a black dingo and a x-breed red cattle dog were standing in front of me across the road and my new kelpie pup was with me following.
I took them back to my place in town and fed them.
I can't say they had been neglected by the person house sitting, but i don't take that chance anyhow.
Of captivity,or tame, are you and the animal bonded and see a cooperative purpose to be together. Work dogs often do if there is something to do. IT DOES NOT HAVE CONSEQUENCE IF BOTH OF YOU ARE COOPERATIVE BY THE HUMAN SIDES INTELLECT AND HANDLING. THERE IS NOT MUCH SAFELY LEAVED OUT THERE FOR WILD ANIMALS TO HAVE IS MY STATEMENT OF IT ALL. SO DO THE RIGHT THING AND BE AWARE THEY ARE CLOSER THAN EVER BEFORE AND THAT THEY WILL REQUIRE HUMAN ASSISTANCE. PERHAPS EVEN HUMAN EMOTIONAL SUPPORT BY BEING A HIGHER BEING, NOT JUST SOME PETTY BORN FREE AFTER SHAVE COMMERCIALISM DEPICTIONS.

..."my Auntie has a fox that visits her garden regularly, should she put a collar & lead on it?"...In what context visit? If it hangs around in Australia you do everything you can to find all of them and exterminate them or you are committing an indictable(jailable gaolable) offence.There is the tiniest possibility in Australia that she could obtain a keepers license for a fox, a serious invasive pest called a vermin.
Feral.org.au
In the UK _she could well put a collar on it if she can trap it and calm it and foster a relationship with it._

..."are t the forefront in trying to save them from extinction!"...
Youv'e told me that, but don't make me watch them being such losers please(grant thier rabies vaccine makes a difference though) as they place them back out on the shelling ranges and land mines.
There is no place for the Ethiopian wolfs survival until humans lie down wit a roll over protection for the pups in a domesticated control lifestyle system for the next few decades.
Don't make me cheer the losers when thy are all gone soon.
If they do survive that will only be stupid luck.
Biological Scientists know how to assist and sustain life with potential in circumstance,
however they do not know security policy, humanbattle psychology and "the machines"
methods , means to end that has no remorse or ethical values.
Those animals are already too close to Somalia at this time.

*.."& i know Dingos & Wolves hung around man but they were free to come & go, so whats your point?"...*
I'll say that more simply, but its not that simple anyhow.
Humans are the top order predator and eat meat. - wolves are not too bad either for the same point until you reach a system of lifestyle with technology.
For size, speed, agility, sensitivity, ability to finally learn to cooperate with humans in survival situations, even wolves not Canis Familiaris area good spatial dynamic fit physically, even in times of drought.

The wince about familiaris is it is two problems, 
they are probably inferiors that should ecologically be dead.
It is also effectively probably artificially constructed through inbreeding thousands of years back too.

The real truth is it probably is not ecologically sound / safe for the environment and all familiaris should be destroyed because of the two previous points.

They(familiaris) were probably only kept as gaurd dogs for watching them sense things humans simply could not e.g. their night vision.
If a dog was able to survive outside of human assistance, obviously it would seek the things wolves seek that you are warned of if you ever keep one. One important one is climbing to the top of the hierarchy of the group.
No human primitive society would want or allow it , so it would leave if it was not dependent.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

i think you should warn people you have a touch of verbal diahorrealol
ye so wolves have a structured hierachy, just the way it should be

i have no idea what you mean in the paragraph after that

its great that your Dingo had a good life, but you must know that many DONT!

Its unbelievable that you think organisations like the Born Free Foundation are "losers", yes they saved the species from rabies!!! infact if it wasnt for them taking up the plight of the Ethiopean wolf, they would probably already have disappeared, & you would never have even heard of them!

i think i finally "understand" what you are trying to say, you believe that because wild places are dwindling, the canids should be kept as pets to "preserve" them!!! lol

well i think if they are to be preserved in captivity it should be places like the I.W.R.C (i mentioned earlier), not in some d...heads (as you call them) back yard!!!!!!!

It seems that you believe in keeping wild animals captive, whilst i (like the BFF) believe wild animals belong in the wild!!

also i dont think you understand that canis familiaris is DOMESTICATED & not suppose to survive in the wild, were as Wolves (canis lupus!!) are WILD & are not suppose to live as pets!!!

& i was being sarcastic about the fox LOL


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

..."i think you should warn people you have a touch of verbal diahorrea"...

No. I told you that if you want to debate or question i cannot simply answer with a few words. That will only create more questions where the answer is unsufficient.

..."but you must know that many DONT!"..._( treated well in captivity or keeping )_
Absolutely, and the sick point about regulations is the pens and the barbed wire to keep them, though if that is done with one of the people(usually paired adults in a stable relationship)around always (24 hours ish) , thats often irrelevent and they get plenty of time inside and at the side of the person.
Where Dingos occur often as starved and finally cruelly die, as beforementioned(arid or desert environment in central inland) is nowhere people or prey (also the some state regulations do not allow keeping, only NSW , ACT , NT are allowed) are found in any real numbers of populous. They simply cross these bad areas and don't make it from starvation because of other dogs territory and its lack of shareable prey.

The problem with regulations is that if you do want to do anything for them, you will not be able unless keeping is allowed. 
You will be committing an offence _unless you have _ or _have built through time(dangerously legaly)_ the proxy to the fact and association to the animal intended to be helped. 
E.G. In the united states that wolf in the video in a previous post in this thread can be picked up and helped.
In Australia and many countries you would simply here a gunshot(that kills the injured animal) as you sat in the forest in a police or other-alike authorised force vehicle with hands cuffed behind your back.
There are points at which helping such an animal in or outside of a National Park _*will only appear to be a serious offence in progress no matter how good the intention*_.
For Dingos, they are contradictively in legislation classified as an invasive pest species and vermin, so therefore also not allowably warrant *interference*(legal defined word for bothering) because you may as well be charged with the offence relating Fauna.

To do something for an injured animal people often legaly risk what can be described as_ a silent race with the devil_ to get the animal to vet.
If they were intercepted at points, they well could be subject to as much as 24 hours questioning in police station , and , worthless inclusion on bugging lists for Secret National Security and, international treaty lists such as _hmmm_ kept by CITES .
*Thats why regulations are no good and do not help in Australia.*

*
..."i think i finally "understand" what you are trying to say, you believe that because wild places are dwindling, the canids should be kept as pets to "preserve" them!!! lol"...*
In one go there!

..."Ethiopean wolf, they would probably already have disappeared, & you would never have even heard of them!"...
Simien Jackal , As painted all over Ancient Egyptian pyramid walls for 4000 years , The dog god Anubis (proper Latin spelling Anubus), as my black dingo was named.

note: "d...heads" meaning: d...heads with a large quantity of money! (bones , balls , back yard space , instant fix buy books for doggy psychology and or videos e.t.c. American Express or even Bancard with some thing and or even only a good bancard and has with DH a stable woman that keeps all of those if they stray in).
That sort of a point, but i fear you have a silver spoon for comprehension of that(What do you others say, i would have thought you would appreciate the difference as valid down to worse levels)?

* ..."because wild places are dwindling"...*
This is not making a smart remark , but _*how the wild comes to be dwindling*_ is a facet / piece of the order or nature of things(pardon the pun) in human civilisations' progress and expansion called *modern technology*.
That extremely generalising term is all about how much mankind now can manipulate their own surrounding and also more successfully with less of is inclusive any ones' own individual person can now commit vaster larger manipulation of the environment. This is achieved by modern technology and computing but over-all the better educational training techniques that couple to much more accurate information more ready available on call and finally also almost instantly up to date.

Ordinary people simply extend further into wilderness and impact it because they now simply can.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

ye but when you go on & on & on nobody knows what youre talking about, so whats the point of that 

as i said before injured/sick animals should be cared for by wildlife rescue & rehabilitation facilities, breeding these animals for "pets" only puts more strain on places like this!!!!!!

in the USA people can have just about any wild animal, Big cats, Chimps,etc, its a ridiculous situation with thousands of creatures living in misery, in appaling conditions, this is because of poor legislation to protect these animals.

so ya think they should catch all the Etheopian Wolves off the Bale mountains & flog em to wealthy d...heads for "pets". Great Idea
& being as you had heard of the "Simian Jackal" were you just guna let them die out then?????, or were you just hoping that the Born Free Foundation would step in & save them!!!!!???????

i agree about shrinking wilderness its very worrying, but its warped logic to think that all the wildlife will be happy as "pets".

by the way i love the name of your Dingo:thumbup1:


----------



## Guest (Apr 25, 2009)

oh god! I have just read all of this and am more confused than in the start!

Please (for my brains sake) lol use the quote button  it makes things easier, as i keep re-reading messages from other posters, and without a break you launch into your own paragraph.

I think this could be a very interesting debate, however you need to present this in a more reader friendly way. 

Now onto personal opinions:

I disagree wholeheartedly with keeping wild animals as pets, however I do see shades of grey. 

I do see that not every wild animal rescued (from pain, starvation, parental abandonment, illness etc - not just because its tough in the wild, if an animal is healthy then leave it be!) can be returned to the wild. In the more important cases of rare or endangered species these animals should (imho) be put into as near to wild enclosures as possible and used for captive breeding programmes. Programmes with the view of relasing future generation back into the wild to replenish the gene pools and wild stocks.

I have known a number of people who have kept a wild animal as a pet (in the loosest sense of the term) though. 

A friend ( a lady who feeds the recently returned foxes for a few months until they are fully integrated back into the wild), ended up keeping a fox as her own pet. The little vixen had been caught in a trap, at a few weeks old, had her leg amputated and was almost blind. The blindness did not become apparent until she was well on the road to recovery. She would never survive in the wild, and now lives in the garden with a secure run and den built into the garden. The point i am making here about the fox though is that her owner is fully experienced with these animals, and has the knowledge necessary to care for its needs as a wild fox, yet in an enclosed area. She is super friendly, and loves fuss and cuddles, so Yes in a loose term she is a pet, however she is treated with the respect and care needed as a wild animal. You wont find her walking down the road on a collar and lead, neither will you find her tucking into a bowl of dog biscuits. She is fed a raw diet, more akin to the wild foxes diet, so rabbits, chicks, whole chickens. wildfowl and game (fur and feathers included - just dead not alive).

Another friend has an albino hedgehog (ok not a dog), due to its colour it doesnt stand much chance in the wild, so he lives with the other hedgehogs which are being rehabilitated, and will do for the rest of his days. He lives in an enclosure which has been designed to emulate the wild, and he helps raise the babies or injured hedgies which are due to be released soon. He always has at least one housemate. 

The point i am trying to make here is that not every wild animal rescued can be returned, but there are ways to keep them that doesnt mean you make them a true pet. To make them a real pet (collar lead, living in the house etc) to me shows a great lack of respect for the animals in question.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

i totally agree with you BBM!:thumbsup:


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

> ...is that not every wild animal rescued can be returned, but there are ways to keep them that doesnt mean you make them a true pet. To make them a real pet (collar lead, living in the house etc) to me shows a great lack of respect for the animals in question.


Interesting thought you all agree with there. _*Canis Familiaris*_ can now be, either returned to the wild or destroyed on ground of its lack of respect for the ecological effect of interfering with nature by the selection and using inferiors of the canid species and manipulating their aspects through inbreeding and subtle deformity to make somethig truly useless truly inferior truly stupid.
After which _people have the ordacity to use Wolves _ by cross breeding to prop up these peices of both nature and civilisations inbred or simply plain deteriorated flabby garbage.

All the work dogs in the world that are strong and fit and intelegent are Wolf Dog Hybrids.
Kelpie , Australian Cattle Dog , Malamute.

One of the problems you continually miss , is _that of being effective at keeping the animal_ , the other is the actual credible means to end it is achieved beyond simple theory.

Many theoretical management plans and actions are *created based on scientific fact *, they can *easily potentially not operate when applied *as the actual practice, either from economics or from a special point that occurs in the theoretical modelling, (this next particularly)that of something that makes its own personal decisions as a living thing. That fouls the accuracy of the model because it is not accountable in the flow of actions over time(alike evolution).

Finally, its more reliable when you know someone cares because the animal is always there, than to suddenly require funding or some other action for something that will be exticnt when it comes time that something can be done properly by an organisation.
_Born free foundation or not thats still running on massive luck for the Ethiopean Wolf there are fewer than five hundred, and they are all being returned / set loose / replenished into to their machine gun alleys(brilliant yay yay  :cornut: :thumbup1: )._
With organisations keeping in this physical management context(wilderness only) its too dangerous, surplus numbers of wolves are always produced in the context of Dingos, but the mad point of it is it's Authentic healthy genetics requires protection, so more than ever clipping out a live specimen for examination and keeping from pure populations is not a bad idea, attempting to obtain at offspring time with the offspring is also a more credible point.

It goes in my mind the Ethiopean wolf , the Iberean Wolf and Dingos (perhaps the red wolf in America) _should be tested and kept under much closer situation of a pet in a domestic area(housing suburb_ like this one is simply an example Ananova - Pet dog was a wolf )
Much of the behavior and problems that ordinary people would not be able to solve easily until a technique can be applied can then be created and documented.

While *wild *dogs are the devil your saying to handle, They are even being much nicer than you realise if you come away injured from attempted handling because of their skill at inflicting injury , and you probably do not know _how to bicker and ask at them_ neither _read what the answer / result is_ , so i have no sympathy for what your saying about: pets lifestyles , danger(the true main problem) from uncontrolable behavior born of instinct.

_(re: the quoted section)Hey, that's lovely and cuddly and up-rightious of you , but more like a pharisee that bumped off jesus christ albeit in this context somewhat euphomistic so do not try to make it match perfectly in some way_

Stop the born free and wild rot after shave commercial.
Thats fine for most individuals to be in the wild e.g. 99.9999999999999999999999999999999r of them, because that would be the effective type of ratio to pets at any time(if its not half past extinction).

Besides you haven't had a word to say anyhow against fur trappers(which i find amazing) whom happen to be about the only real economic use for wolves apart the chinese meat market.

As far as i concern myself , no-one makes sense to say that a minimum quantity of people as personal pet keepers and are both educated and suitable, and enacting care of a wolf similar to a domestic pet(The same as in this article mentioned before Ananova - Pet dog was a wolf ).
Personal keeping enacted physically as pet keeping, mostly by personal choice obatianed by normal economic business governed promotion.
And note this technique also be used with no relevence to success of other conservation techniques.

_What really turns my stomach is what people think is an attack from a Dingo or wolf_, and how little of their own personal responsibility they see in not allowing the wolves to access a victim.
Victims immense carelessness at interacting when they do not speak wolf language(noises and gestures isms) an worse, or do not reverently realise the very place and ground they are standing, e.g. Alike opening a gate and stepping into a pen(simple analogy).
They continually put down dingos on Fraser Island because people didn't commit the simple common sense of keeping a piece of 45cm long, 5cm diameter hardwood stick with a forked end of the prongs needs to be at least 10cm long on both sides.
You keep the animal back by simply gently placing it under its chin with the neck in between the prongs to prevent it from leaping or moving its mouth too fast directly at the user. And you can inflict a painful wack if ever required to send one away.
*I'll say it for them, since noone else ever has , Fraser Island has a Wilderness area with amenities for tourists. 
It is the real thing, not a zoo.*
*not even less chances as a zoo for the point here.*

What has happened on Fraser Island is suspicous to me, Dingos are Wolves (Canis Lupus Dingo) and if you know Medical Psychology relating a device called a _wolf template_ , the simplified similar characteristics of life living and motive drive of the mind shows there are reaction sets and instances of situations perfectly comprehensible in wolves the same as humans to deliberately cause violence by agitation, thus perhaps resultant killing.

Is that a method of cooking Born Free use on Ethiopean Wolves???:


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Do you come from another planet!???:thumbup1:

why can the DOMESTIC dog be either destroyed or returned to the wild (are you thinking that because it is DOMESTICATED & so not now capable of living in the wild it should be destroyed!!??)

sorry you dont seem to understand just because a Dog was crossed with a wolf GENERATIONS ago dosent NOW make it a HYBRID, unless its been crossed recently(ive forgot how many generations for it to breed pure) the breeds you mention are PURE DOGS!

even the SARLOOS a DOG which was developed using Wolves from the 1920's to the 1960's are now PURE DOGS.

you havent answered my question, what have YOU done to help the Iberian Wolf?????????????????????

this is what BFF have been doing...www.bornfree.org.uk/campaigns/wolves/wolf-news/article/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews[tt_news]=311

why do you keep going on about the poor Ananova wolf ? i think its great that it was rescued, but to see such a Beautiful animal on he end of a chain really upsets me!!!!!!! you obviously think this is how to keep these animals I DONT!!!!!!!!

WHO said wild dogs are the devil to handle  

& what the hell has Jesus got to do with anything  

& Why do you keep going on about BORN FREE & Aftershave commercials :lol:LOL

I think Trappers, Chinese meat & fur markets, infact ANYONE who uses these animals for ECONOMIC GAIN are DISCUSTING!!! is that clear enough for you??

well i think the way to deal with the Dingo's on Fraser Island is stay in groups, dont feed or interact with them, dont poke them with sticks!!!!! LOL
in other words LEAVE THEM ALONE!!

"is that a method of cooking Born Free use on Ethiopean Wolf???" LOOK youve even confused yourself....LMAO:cornut:


----------



## waggytailsstore (Mar 22, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> Do you come from another planet!???:thumbup1:
> 
> why can the DOMESTIC dog be either destroyed or returned to the wild (are you thinking that because it is DOMESTICATED & so not now capable of living in the wild it should be destroyed!!??)
> 
> ...


WOW!!!!!! I've just read thru that lot before breakfast and I'm exhausted. Some very good points raised tho, I'm definitely not experienced enough to make any comments but lots of food for thought there. Does go on a bit tho! And also very confusing in places. Keep it going.


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

> why can the DOMESTIC dog be either destroyed or returned to the wild (are you thinking that because it is DOMESTICATED
> & so not now capable of living in the wild it should be destroyed!!??)


Firstly, hybrids are inferior but do often keep up with packs. Secondly, all descended domestic dogs are inferior to wolves(Lupus) and of dubious origin of genetics, e.g inferiors that required humans for survival.
_ The sad problem is that every time people want a good dog and to improve them physically they can rarely achieve that when not using wolves, hence many of the wolf-dog hybrids production and new breeds of dog._



> why do you keep going on about the poor Ananova wolf ? i think its great that it was rescued, but to see such a Beautiful
> animal on he end of a chain really upsets me!!!!!!! you obviously think this is how to keep these animals I DONT!!!!!!!!


AT THIS POINT I'LL WARN YOU NOT TO DEROGATE WHAT I HAVE PREVIOUSLY STATED _..."I DON'T OBVIOUSLY THINK THAT"...._
Anubus was almost exclusively was kept alike a work dog and _generally never on a chain at any time_ except special 
situations of i use a chain for my dogs to the level of being told to put him back into the utility because i never used
a chain except for training as a technique(like intensive concentration work out). (Remeber i told you in a post)Some dogs _not on a chain_ came 8-10km to see me when someone neglected them.



> & what the hell has Jesus got to do with anything
> & Why do you keep going on about BORN FREE & Aftershave commercials LOL


I'm talking about what can and is fact in keeping the actual corpus physical existence of an animal species alive.
I am not refering to the words in context of "wild" and "wild animal" conjunct with "taming" or "hippieism" or any other emotionalism such as religion or misguided taught prejudice automatic reaction with propaganderistic(_Aftershave commercials advertising imagery of life and involvement of it in the wild as it is exhilerating_ thoughtless said garbage , automatic anti statements by creed) statement such that greens have too ready(So ready they simply hurt themselves).
*Keeping wolves as pets personally for those that are willing to learn is much safer for them against extinction than standard conservation techniques for two major reasons.:mad5:
1.Greater assurance of offspring survival success of perfect genetic heritage:mad5:
2.(This is a difficult one to grasp because of rescue sancturies)Better assured economic continuation (its not financed as charity its personal savings):mad5:

Unfortunately anything else is seroius risk enough to warrant this obviously unpopular technique.*:mad2:



> WHO said wild dogs are the devil to handle


_I said_:devil:, i've met them near Jugiong , in Tumut , near Warragamba where i lived as a child. Particularly when i was a child when putting my hand out to any that got close enough they would grab my arm with there teeth(generally the result if you keep them calm enough as you subtly move move up to them over a period of time and continually attract their attention).
I know wild dogs(Dingos) perfectly well at face value to meeting them, thats true they are dangerous as wild animals if you do not comprehend whether your associations and attention is welcome. But it is possible to get past even mild aggression of their worry without being torn up or attacked.
The so called recent attacks on Fraser Island sound more like playing , and something simply attracted them in another recent case.

Is that(heavy machine gun fire and land mines) a method of cooking Born Free use on Ethiopean Wolves???


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

i'll ask again! WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO HELP THE ETHIOPEAN WOLF THEN???

right reading through your gobbledygook this is what i think you mean, wild canids should be kept as pets to preserve them, there should be no legislation to protect them,breeding wolf/dog hybrids is good cos domestic dogs are weak & couldnt survive in the wild, conservation charities like BFF dont help animals, is that what you are saying

well its people like Jim Dutcher with Wolves,George Adamson with Lions,Daphne Sheldrick with Elephants that i admire, these people not only care about saving the species but care about the quality of lives of the individuals. The "Pet trade" in these species has only caused harm to probably millions of individuals.

why not take a look at this video of Jim Dutcher & his friends the Wolves & then tell me you think they would be happy as someones PET!
YouTube - Living With Wolves Part 1

& just to add DINGO'S decended from DOMESTIC DOGS!!!!!!!


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

> i'll ask again! WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO HELP THE ETHIOPEAN WOLF THEN???
> 
> right reading through your gobbledygook this is what i think you mean, wild canids should be kept as pets to preserve them, there should be no legislation to protect them,breeding wolf/dog hybrids is good cos domestic dogs are weak & couldnt survive in the wild, conservation charities like BFF dont help animals, is that what you are saying
> 
> ...


*Read your own post and decide what you're trying to say against what i said, but also properly read my post. Also , if you do not get / have above 120 in a standard IQ please discontinue (generally a basic science degree level or more difficult Arts degree e.g. Psychology)*
I don't care what someone looks like in their video about wolves as some elses lucid disjointed answer about their own personal interpretation of the word (domestic)pet.



> these people not only care about saving the species but care about the quality of lives of the individuals. The "Pet trade" in these species has only caused harm to probably millions of individuals.


Here is mildly higher concept to that problem surrounding "pet" "caring" and "legislation / regulations" a vermin / pest species cannot be declared a pet requiring the type of regulation you are talking if it is illegal to keep. So it is not a pet. Its animal involved in a criminal offence of keeping.
A pet if legal has stipulated values and responsibilities that go beyond humanitarian actions upon animals. If a so called pet(that does not ever exist under your context of the situation "illegal keeping" you used it) is abused it around only incurs a fine, unless its nature is properly despicable for purpose of jailing. A vermin is not a pet.
A pet is something that must as much have a legally defined owner that is responsible at all times for their animal, of there are extra regulations for those animals, that go far beyond simple humanitarian action towrd them.
Your idea of pet, and regulations and being humanitarian to animals is a bit excessively twisted of its definition against what i am saying.

And do not tell me about Dingos, CSIRO is where i learned about Dingos' historic genetic heritage and I am aware their was a dispute to its proper scientific name, one was Canis Familiaris Dingo , the other Canis Lupus Dingo of the latter was found to be(Lupus).

As for the Ethiopean Wolf at least here for it i have told of the logistic of replenishing Land mine fields and machine gun bottleneck Alleys such as passes with Wolves.
Scientists some of the time are not good at some facets of security(You do not require livestock for someone to even as much as feel a reason to open fire on wolves).


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

in't it extraordinary that someone as "Intelligent" as you cant even string a single coherent sentence together:lolnow that IS Genius!) lol

i'll ask for the 3rd time WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO HELP THE ETHIOPEAN WOLF?


I'nt it Amazing that the DINGO decended from that weakling "canis familiaris"??:thumbup1:

& why wouldnt someone who is interested in Wolves look at the Jim Dutcher video?? surely you want to learn all you can about them? before you stick em on a collar & chain!


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

This thread just comes across as someone filling a post with waffle, statements that make no sense, and contradictions, all with the intent of justifying keeping wild animals as pets.

Keeping wild animals as pets WILL NOT protect or save a species. This has been proven with the keeping of big cats. They are generic animals, not true to their species.


----------



## Guest (Apr 26, 2009)

Right first and formost - I object strongly to ANYONE (you me or the cats uncle) making degrading comments about another posters IQ.

onto the hybrids.... (not technically a wild animal as they have been manmade, either purposefully or accidentally)

I do not personally like wolf/dog hybrids, however i can see how (more due to their domestic dogs heritage) can be kept as pets. However some of the facilities I have observed online that keep these animals, do so in fairly naturalistic environments, with faux cubbing dens for security and large open paddocks for free excercise. They are also usually fed a raw diet. I will state that these are the few facilities i have abserved and do not know if this is the norm.

I do not think that many domesticated animals have the ability to survive in the wild, with the main exception of some ancient breeds of cattle, pig and sheep. Many of todays modern domesticated animals require much more husbandry to survive than the lower yeilding (be that meat, milk, eggs or working ability) than the ancient breeds. 

Many of the ancient breeds of dogs, would look to an outsider at needing more care and attention than the average mutt. This would be true in areas outside their natural and evolved habitats. Keeping a husky in central london will need more care and attention to its working insincts and behavours than if it was born in the arctic and worked for a living. Another prime example of this is the border collie sheepdogs. Outside of their natural environments as working animals on a farm their high intelligence can become a problem (even a nuicence) for the average owner. Special care has to be taken into consideration about how that animal is kept in order for it to live a fulfilled life.

With regards to keeping wild animals such as the wolf, dingo, etc in zoo's for captive breeding programmes, where is your stance on this?


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

There have been a few instances where so called "pet" wolves and wolf hybrids have attacked their owners or their families. They have always resorted back to their wild nature. One hybrid attacked and killed a 9 year old girl, but it didnt end there, it then started to consume her.

Keeping wild animals, or their crosses as pets, is setting a very dangerous precedence. The dog has been domesticated over thousands of years, and even now is far from perfect and trustworthy in many cases.

The needs of a wild animal can not be met in a domestic situation. Over 90% of these "pets" exhibit sterotypical behaviour caused by the stress, boredom and un-natural environment. Anyone who claims they own one to help protect and preserve a species is a fool, and an ignorant one at that.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

have a look at this BBM all over the USA sanctuaries for these hybrids are turning hundreds of these animals away because they are full to bursting, euthanasia is the only option for many because "pet owners" cant cope with them once they reach adolecence, its a massive crisis overthere, loads of them are bred in "puppy mills" cos its a big industry. Its tragic
Wolf Park - Wolf Hybrid Position

good post Nonnie, i agree.


----------



## Guest (Apr 26, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> have a look at this BBM all over the USA sanctuaries for these hybrids are turning hundreds of these animals away because they are full to bursting, euthanasia is the only option for many because "pet owners" cant cope with them once they reach adolecence, its a massive crisis overthere, loads of them are bred in "puppy mills" cos its a big industry. Its tragic
> Wolf Park - Wolf Hybrid Position
> 
> good post Nonnie, i agree.


Oh thats terrible!  For the hybrids themselves, and even more so for the wild animals that have been used and now the uneducated masses have a preconcieved idea of what they are like. I can see why puppy farms have cashed in, its a fad, and therefore they will breed anything to make a quick buck!


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

Please use fact not disproportionate overconcerned emotive to disregard statements i make(Do not attempt defacing of the information by derrogation, that is vandalism of facts).
_I do not accept anyone whom has the ordacity to degrade themself relating their IQ 
by their own misleading , wowsered and downright scientifically unaccurate
statements of a subject and derrogates another persons intentions using biased and 
misleading statements as evidence._

*
HERE IS A SELECTION OF USEFUL READINGS

Wolf sub species analysis
http://www.wolf.org/wolves/news/iwmag/2004/summer/world.pdf

Status of the White footed Asian Wolf(Related to the Thailand Dingo)
http://www.briarjensen.com.au/articles/Dingo Dilemma.PDF

Extinction of Dingos CSIRO
ECOS Magazine - Towards A Sustainable Future

Various writings, links and articles about Dingos and Wolves zipped
http://www.nicephotog-jsp.net/dingo-pets-legislation.zip

And search DEFRA for "wolfdog" or "Wolf-Dog"
Defra, UK - Error page
*



> but it didnt end there, it then started to consume her


Wowsering!
Your talking also of a number of Familiaris breeds that have that against them too.
Thats relating to what i said before, to remember they are a carnivore and have 
particular instinctive psychological directives. It may have been tamed, I would really like to read that article
and obtain more definitive case information records.
I found an article a number of days back of what appears to be some people sitting *a wolf (in the USA)* 
http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/archive/x1697676952
and it had no authority person for it that it knew of well enough, only some relatives of the person. Apart to
why they think it attacked them, 
Try this for easy to simulate of that.
Lets in test 1 leave the animal on a _piece of cord_ for a long period in a house with three people one whom cannot do much. But in fundamental , it hasn't been able to get outside to deficate by that point of simulated carelessness.
Test 2 , let's try the same as build up of urine or as a normal situation both.
*You could try this at home*
The conditions are:
-An animal that has some sense of loyalty to one person.
-people present that know the animal but do not commit much interaction with it but it _knows of_ them.
(the eighty year old is quite useless anyhow)
-The animal is fastened by a cord to some solid structure of e.g. 2 meters maximum.
-IT IS HOUSE TRAINED WELL, and house living is standard.
-The animal is at least 3 years old.
As you can see it was probably absolutely bu(r)sting for a leak or do-doggy-does-what-does-doggy-do.

Eventually i do not believe they did anything more than panic the animal after they themselves paniced. It read as pathetic
and lame by them with possible pure negligence of which might i say that could have been all getting that bloke
past the wolf in the ANNOVA article of which thats all that gets many pet owners past hundreds of mankiller pets
each year. Ultimately the wolf did not actually have a trusted surrogate master/mistress there. 
Niether did it commit a real attempt at killing / savaging them, neither instantly attempt anything much either.



> Keeping wild animals, or their crosses as pets, is setting a very dangerous precedence.
> The dog has been domesticated over thousands of years, and even now is far from perfect
> and trustworthy in many cases.


Read this , its a commercially researched article: Crossing the Line - The Case Against Hybrids: Before You Adopt: Petfinder Library
In the united states two breeds of domestic dog are 10:1 more than all others of which 
wolf-dog hybrids are not much different on average to all the other domestic dogs.

In either case , wolf-dog or wolf they are not much more dangerous than the normal bulk 
of familiaris incidents of which even those are considered statistical for value and are
simply peoples' carelessness at handling that is lame / a poor show.



> I can see why puppy farms have cashed in, its a fad, and therefore they will breed anything to make a quick buck!


Best comprehend for years at a time thats the ecology of the economic environment because there is nothing else holding up somethings existence.
Are you trying to say that if people can allow a species to die or be ignored by not having promotional half examples and *by not paying* that extinction is acceptable???
Governments really only kill them if they become a problem, they are being generous alike the primary producers like to say because they haven't killed them all in one go which is a cheaper action even for a government in the long run, and possibly less than they pay for them any one year in total for both research and management of one species.

This was a link:


> Wolf Park - Wolf Hybrid Position


_These people as cold "Hard Liners" are not helping their own case there(hmmmmm as much as i would like to say)._ As i stated before, United States legislation is divided by states legislation of the keeping of Wolves as any type of pet (There is no such thing as a personal zoo to that point) but it is always the same reason only that they ban personal keeping of wolves and hybrids, of is for most Danger (the hoo! ha! and general community restlessness and fear of the concept), but also indemnities and costs of policing regulations and management. What will always give them in some states the right to keep them is their constitutional right of freedom that would be derogated and devalued if they could not keep them of is often the argument against banning in state regulation. The argument is rather than banning its general sense that it is down to the owners responsibility of his property and its actions but obviously inside some boundaries as cities or in flat units it would be, both unsafe for others mainly and perhaps potentialy unkind(inhumane).

Understand that if something is wild , there are no regulations of which only come into effect for special purposes. Adding regulations does not raise the carrying capacity or area of forests and wilderness on the earth, it merely makes it more effective and reliable for keeping what is actualy finitely there and existent overcrowded.



> *His work is supported by the Born Free Foundation. A rabies outbreak in 1990 reduced the largest known population, found in the Bale Mountains National Park, from about 440 wolves to less than 160 in only two weeks.
> Ethiopian Wolf - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


*If this above has any truth Everyone should be a little quicker in reconsidering to go onto my plan and not profaning the word _fool_ conjunct to me. It requires a 24*7 _"intensive - together" _to tame an animal to a master. That week is all expenses paid including showing the animal how things operate to allay fear and worry, working on basic problem solving and communication skills interspecies, general healthy diet and feeding for high stress/long periods awake worry lifestyles. General inductance training is also standard.:w00t:

http://www.nicephotog-jsp.net/Dingone.pdf

*You continue missing the point and the recommendations for personal keeping that are implied by the problems'(personal keeping) being as the only safe solution.*

These blokes do not approve of it either , i've never found so much writ all over the internet of people who do but don't say!!!:blink:
Dingo Discovery Centre - Owning a dingo


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

whats up are you angry cos DINGO's descended from DOG's??? 

Ive read the ist link ist very interesting

why do you think theres such a crisis in the USA with "PET" wild animals & hybrids????

why wouldnt legislation help these animals???? i cant get on the article but you say people were SITTING on a wolf & yet you dont want legislation! dont you care that so many are abused then

why keep breeding hybrids when most ordinary people cant even cope with them? look on the internet theres hundreds of rescue centres for these animals, dosent that tell you something!!??? (mind you you think these people who rescue them are "COLD HARDLINERS" dont you??ut:

why are you talking about hybrids as a "species"??? you think puppy farmers are good cos theyre saving them from extinction, am i right????

"PERHAPS potentially unkind(inhumane)" to keep them in flats......you are from another planet 

& back to the Ethiopean Wolf, your idea of "Taming" them & dishing them out as "pets" is a JOKE, these animals have NEVER been kept or bred in zoo's, so who knows if they would even breed in captivity????

with the support of the BORNFREE FOUNDATION a proposal is being developed to set up & manage a long term naturalistic breeding facility or facilities within Ethiopia dedicated to the EW.
Appoval will be sought from the Ethiopean authorities for the facilities within Ethiopea.


----------



## Guinevere13 (Mar 31, 2008)

I am sorry, but through all the superfluous verbiage, you are just advocating owning wild animals as pets. Well I am afraid you wont get any sales here. Quote or ignore me all you like, but I think you will find the majority will not agree with you, no matter how "strongly" you put it. And yes, I have read and understood your arguments, my IQ is quite sufficient thank you.


----------



## Guest (Apr 27, 2009)

Right you like facts, here are a few of mine, i dont support them all but here they are nontheless...

Hybrids are not a species - fact

hybrids need specialist care and experience to be kept - fact

Hybrid canids (the definition being a cross between a domestic dog and a wild canid species) are filling up the rescue centres in the USA when people realise that their designer "dog" is much more wild than ever anticipated - fact

Hybrid canids are being puppy farmed - fact

puppy farming is wrong on every ethical and moral level. The only being who benefits is the puppy farmer - fact

Hybrid canids can be kept and enjoyed with the right experience and support - fact

wild canids kept in captivity need specialist care and experience to be kept healthily, safely, naturally and ethically - fact

wild canids of some species are suffering a decline due to many factors, habitat loss, hunting, poaching, preconcieved misconceptions from the uneducated masses - fact

crossbreeding wild canid species with domestic dogs will not prevent a species from becoming extinct - fact (For an example of this please refer to the native horses of the uk. Dartmoor, exmoor, new forest etc pony's are suffering major decline due to the crossbreeding with more modern domestic species. Another example is the red deer in scotland, the red deer are declining due to the introduction of the japanese sika deer. If they continue breeding with this species we may see the total loss of the red deer)


What is wowsering?, from what i understand wowser is an australian term meaning " an expression contempt for anothers views". How nice


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

> why wouldnt legislation help these animals????


Did i ever actually say that. You missed a clear context of the word "deregulation" in
terms of regulations being a hinderence to effective coexistence and management of Dingos
in the earlier posts.
Look at these
TRAFFIC TRAFFIC - About TRAFFIC

CITES Wildlife trade policy reviews

and see if you can honestly tell me if i really would find them offensive for
having regulations and international regulations enacted. The regulations i was talking of
are from a government that is either stuck or two faced and double standard at its policy,
that confers with every party at the same level.



> _you think puppy farmers are good *cos theyre saving them from extinction*_, am i right????


At a second stage value(after making available under such schematics) of anything that 
can be economically driven that would be there as such is inevitable $$$$$ think why for
those that do that. Thats beyond and outside the reasons here for most of it but i thought it would become part of discussion somewhere because personal economics as a safety measure(alike regulations) is a peice of the point of the technique. Actually taking it as far as economic aspirations from a sales perspective is finally irrelevent to the technique.
Note: I have italisised the text in the quote to show you and examplify the way you derrogate and commit erroneous attack at my statements, of the main fabrication by you is in bold text.:cursing:



> I am sorry, but through all the superfluous verbiage, you are just advocating owning wild animals as pets.


Not wild, specially bred and prepared (note that i do mean Canis Lupus breeds not hybrids(of you were informed before that they are not much worse than the nicer domestic dogs as a danger) ) _(cease the erroneous statements :mad5:, That man committed a real deliberate part in the creation of Canis Familiaris genetics is erroneous because there is unsufficient evidence , it is simply only supposed possible / likely, thought it is evolved from Canis Lupus Lupus and then was bred for selected characteristics. Any known proper selective breeding is quite modern and well aside to the time it takes to create serious DNA chain differences to the clade in evolution)._
And that is only one point (though if they were either tame or as they should be, from parentage handled by people in captivity so the pups know nothing of the "wild" of you speak). The verbiage(as you call it) is not superfluous, it allows communication.
The particular animal in this is quite capable of moral enaction so therefore absolutely able to cooperate with a bonded carer and others as sensibility is managed in its upbringing(Isn't it always the way , they are only a dumb animal with no hope of survival when things like you want to call them that, isn't it Canis Lupus is perfectly capable of being obedient, trained and almost undangerous(note Canis Lupus is a canid) ).



> hybrids need specialist care and experience to be kept - fact


Did you know, every owner of either Kelpies or Australian Cattle Dogs successfully are experienced Hybrid owners!!! Fact!!!
Did you know that every owner of Kelpie or Cattle Dog teams / packs is an extremely experienced hybrid keeper.
_For that one, wait 'till you figure it.:cornut::hand::thumbup1::mad2:_



> crossbreeding wild canid species with domestic dogs will not prevent a species from becoming extinct


I told you to cease the erroneous fabricated logic about my statements:mad5:.


----------



## Guinevere13 (Mar 31, 2008)

nicephotog said:


> And that is only one point (though if they were either tame or as they should be, from parentage handled by people in captivity so the pups know nothing of the "wild" of you speak). The verbiage(as you call it) is not superfluous, it allows communication.
> The particular animal in this is quite capable of moral enaction so therefore absolutely able to cooperate with a bonded carer and others as sensibility is managed in its upbringing(Isn't it always the way , _they are only a dumb animal with no hope of survival when_ *things like you *_want to call them that,_ isn't it Canis Lupus is perfectly capable of being obedient, trained and almost undangerous(note Canis Lupus is a canid) ).
> 
> I told you to cease the erroneous fabricated logic about my statements:mad5:.


Excuse me (note manners) could I please point out your error (I also do not like erroneous fabricated statements). Where did a "thing like me" say anything about animals being dumb? Believe me it isn't the animals I think are dumb.


----------



## Guest (Apr 27, 2009)

> Not wild, specially bred and prepared (note that i do mean Canis Lupus breeds not hybrids(of you were informed before that they are not much worse than the nicer domestic dogs as a danger) ) _(cease the erroneous statements :mad5:, That man committed a real deliberate part in the creation of Canis Familiaris genetics is erroneous because there is unsufficient evidence , it is simply only supposed possible / likely, thought it is evolved from Canis Lupus Lupus and then was bred for selected characteristics. Any known proper selective breeding is quite modern and well aside to the time it takes to create serious DNA chain differences to the clade in evolution)._
> And that is only one point (though if they were either tame or as they should be, from parentage handled by people in captivity so the pups know nothing of the "wild" of you speak). The verbiage(as you call it) is not superfluous, it allows communication.
> The particular animal in this is quite capable of moral enaction so therefore absolutely able to cooperate with a bonded carer and others as sensibility is managed in its upbringing(Isn't it always the way , they are only a dumb animal with no hope of survival when things like you want to call them that, isn't it Canis Lupus is perfectly capable of being obedient, trained and almost undangerous(note Canis Lupus is a canid) ).


I just want to be quite clear here. So what you are suggesting is not hybridising lupus species with domestic dogs, but domesticating the lupus species?



> Did you know, every owner of either Kelpies or Australian Cattle Dogs successfully are experienced Hybrid owners!!! Fact!!!
> Did you know that every owner of Kelpie or Cattle Dog teams / packs is an extremely experienced hybrid keeper.
> _For that one, wait 'till you figure it.:cornut::hand::thumbup1::mad2:_


Many many generations down the line. Similar (although even less) than the development of the bengal cats. Bengals re derived from a hybrid of a wild cat to todays modern domesticated cats. They are newer in development so there are still some f1 & f2 generation crosses out there. Many of these need special handling due to their wild heritage. With selected breeding the wildness is minimised to produce a cat that "looks" wild but isnt. They are still not for a first time cat owner imho though.



> I told you to cease the erroneous fabricated logic about my statements:mad5:.


 Please do not insult me or my intelligence. Perhaps you should make your views and comments clear and concise.

I simply stated a fact (just like you have been apparently). Crossbreeding and hybridising will NOT prevent a species from becoming extinct - i dont understand what you disagree with on that? There is no fabricated or erroneous logic, would you like me to fill my page with waffle and cite at least 6 articles to support it?, if you would like them let me know, however you will find the articles using a simple search engine such as google.


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

> not hybridising lupus species with domestic dogs, but domesticating the lupus species?


There is a second example of you missing the point of the statements,( _..."domesticating the lupus species"..._ ) committing similar for them, as many as possible pure Lupus types personally kept.
*As many as possible* because they simply are not the thing to keep as a pet and from ones own finance.
I hardly think they appeal to anyone that cannot comprehend canis behavior and more official people could warn or deny , advise and assess allowance to own one.

In Australia that type of canid behavior Lupus has (wolves wolfish) is for many common and well understood in some terms of a bond and living with them because of the animals used here for farming and sometimes found and kept like mine.

When it reaches Canis Lupus Lupus or others for the same point of preservation, that it be but its not sensible until its in the thousands of animals _kept_ that can be brought around to clap with one and the other for safe accurate regeneration.



> They are still not for a first time cat owner imho though.


And believe it or not, many people are warned continualy in Australia about the Cattle Dog as a first dog.
But that may as well be many of the gaurd dog familiaris types also.


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

Are you claiming the Kelpie comes from the Dingo?


----------



## Guest (Apr 27, 2009)

Nonnie said:


> Are you claiming the Kelpie comes from the Dingo?


i hope not! the cattle dog though is believed to have been created through breeding with the dingo.

I will need some time to digest your other comments nictopdog, before replying.


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

billyboysmammy said:


> i hope not! the cattle dog though is believed to have been created through breeding with the dingo.
> 
> I will need some time to digest your other comments nictopdog, before replying.


In all honesty, im not sure what this person is on about half the time.

Funny how they dont post in any other thread (except their own welcome one, with yet again more ignorant rubbish)


----------



## Guest (Apr 27, 2009)

nicephotog said:


> There is a second example of you missing the point of the statements,( _..."domesticating the lupus species"..._ ) committing similar for them, as many as possible pure Lupus types personally kept.
> *As many as possible* because they simply are not the thing to keep as a pet and from ones own finance.
> I hardly think they appeal to anyone that cannot comprehend canis behavior and more official people could warn or deny , advise and assess allowance to own one.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry i missed of the apostrophy I meant species' (plural) rather than species

ok i want to recap in simple terms to see if i am understanding you properly. I dont want to be accused of misunderstanding again i find it insulting as your posts are so misleading and full of nothing but big words withoug actually getting your point accross. The use of superfluous terminology isnt necessary, and doesnt make a person look smarter.

1) You would like to see all canis lupus species (of which there are many) in a breeding scheme to domesticate them?

2) With regards to some of the more recognised dangerous canis lupus species (domesticated under your scheme), you would like there to be a higher power granting licence or permission to own one?

3) You would like as many breeders as possible to join you on this venture for 2 reasons. 1- it would be impossible financially for you to undertake this on your own. 2- the larger quantities being selectively bred will mean domestication can happen alot quicker.

Please either confirm my understanding of this - with yes or no.

If no, then please could you write in laymans terms exactly what it is you are trying to say.



> And believe it or not, many people are warned continualy in Australia about the Cattle Dog as a first dog.
> But that may as well be many of the gaurd dog familiaris types also.[/


 I dont know enough about the cattle dog to comment on its worthieness as a family pet. Its hard to generalise a breed as there will always be individuals which do not fit the general mould, however it doesnt mean that reccomendations and advice should be dismissed.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

nicephotog said:


> Did i ever actually say that. You missed a clear context of the word "deregulation" in
> terms of regulations being a hinderence to effective coexistence and management of Dingos
> in the earlier posts.
> Look at these
> ...


well i think we agree on something Governments are hopeless at protecting these animals, & i do know what you mean by "deregulation" its just happened to the Wolves of Greater Yellowstone & surrounding states, but 2 wrongs dont make a right, keeping them as pets is wrong.

i have no idea what youre saying in your next paragraph

the domestication of "canis familiaris began over 20,000 years, you cant expect a Wolf to become "domesticated" overnight! Why should a magnificent animal like a Wolf be "obedient & trained"! & what do you mean by "ALMOST UNDANGEROUS"!! LOL

i see cattle dogs all the time at shows they are just DOGS & even IF SOME! kelpies etc do have Dingo in them, the DINGO originates from DOMESTIC DOGS which reverted back to the Wild!!!!! its not the same as crossing a kelpie with a Wolf!!!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

nicephotog said:


> And believe it or not, many people are warned continualy in Australia about the Cattle Dog as a first dog.
> But that may as well be many of the gaurd dog familiaris types also.


some breeds are more difficult than others, mine is another which isnt recommended fo the 1st time dog owner.

ITS NOT BECAUSE THEYRE WOLF HYBRIDS!!1


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Guinevere13 said:


> And yes, I have read and understood your arguments, my IQ is quite sufficient thank you.


Guinevere you have my repect!!! im giving you a blob for that!


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

$$$$$ (puppy farming) Things will make money using whatever they have access to anyhow, stop trying to say dirty money requires only this technique as means to wolf puppy farming or Hybrid puppy farming.



> Why should a magnificent animal like a Wolf be "obedient & trained"!


The reasons Why humans and environmental caretakers can take over like 
an Alpha but generally better.
Because we are human and _because whether in God or in Nature, there is
a right over animals and their lives by humans specifically "no matter
what anyone may think could drag human value down to that of an animal"._
Giving anything beyond being humane to animals is a dangerous and unethical
practice against your own species much too easily, not that people do not form more complex arguments about the value system.

_In the United States you could easily attract someone to murder you if you
made heavier statements about puppy farmers,"people gotta eat and pay bills"._

The human is the top order predator not wolves or anything else.
If you want to see humans have an unexorable link to wolves or any animals,
the theory is that the abilities of humans at any era of time have the 
ability to learn and manipulate all manner of shapes and objects as help for
them. 
Meaning You stupid assess they realy should not be seperate from them(any) 
at any time, thats all mortallity adds to. You cannot be present with them
or do anything for them if you do not comprehend them, neither if they are
not present.grrnnnk.

Here is a "spatial dynamics of living being relationships similarities of 
primary objective" i theorise. There is no strict evidence to support it
(more i cannot say it shows up in anything except legal theory for the same types of purposes)but it does show up reasonably simply.

From Dingone.pdf (in the year of myself)_===...
They should realise the archaeological implications' point, the point of "final 
human responsibility for environment" is inexorable of mankind on the planet 
(mankind is the top order predator and the most extensible/powerful environment 
modifier) and that Canis Lupus Dingo are alike Canis Familiaris and these unlike 
any other quadruped (except perhaps giant Cats and Felines of only giant cats 
have this last point) by size ,nuisanceless agility in confined spaces such as 
human dwellings, and human compatible cooperativeness from intellect. This is 
strong suggestive evidence Canis Lupus could be only domestic not "wild" and that 
relating the Canis Lupus to have "wild" as a label/being upon it is an offence of 
human environmental neglect, a neglect for the Canis Lupus Dingo, its relative 
Canis Lupus Pallipes, and all others(yes, i have read about clades and branches 
of the DNA chains for proofing species).
...===_

Secondly they (as to vegetation material) can and are in God or Nature
allowed a quantity of exploitation with any surplus(particularly) and 
(as human physiology suggest of the difference) can also be mildly 
synthetically selectively manipulated of their being in sensible safe 
terms(unlike plain cloning or more aptly explained as knowing final 
outcome is safe clean and humane).

Any special cases such as the Ethiopian wolf require special keeping, 
and it is clear that such numbers required are "thousands of" for any 
species going to extinction quickly e.g The Grey wolf Canis Lupus Lupus 
and Red Wolf Canis Lupus Rufus.



> i see cattle dogs all the time at shows they are just DOGS & even IF SOME! kelpies etc do have Dingo in them


You have never handled one(You simply know nothing of their aggression. note: their skull is extremely thick like wolves, they need to be able to survive grazes from cow kicks). I handled three of them 2 x-breed blue(much the same aggressive behaviors when i was aged of 2 to 8) and another Pure Red Heeler (from around 15 to 23years of age).



> the DINGO originates from DOMESTIC DOGS


Scientific name of the *warrigal(Dingo)*: Canis Lupus Dingo
http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Canis_lupus_dingo.html
Note: Are you saying this University is committing false nomenclature. Lupus is effectively the genetic named section of Canidae that are wolves.



> They are building a park enclosure in Bale Mountains.


I thought that was everything you were against, captivity , i mean... why do it? , what for , they are a noble creature that should not have their freedom taken from them and replaced with that horrible,horrible,horrible gold leaf jewel encrusted waiting stool, with all the Canadian salmon serves and lean pet beef and milk, never again simply horrid, horrid, water.

It sounds bad, it isn't. The animal _requires special psychological care(interaction and family placement)_ because of its volitility.
What often goes on in my mind is that anyone would adjust to that major requirement it has at any moment as fundamental to live with another living being. Not kill themselves willingly after paying $100s maybe $1000s of dollars by committing a fundamental relationship neglect or plain selfish being an unsympathetic whole alike anything that is a norm to accept as a relationship.

*The true common sense of saving something that can be synthetically raised*
1. What you want to re think is economic cost and whos money.
2. Who and what you neglect and insult by caring about any animal by doing something for it physically or economically, and if that's right anyway.
Unless they are valuable as a pet, someone may as well hand out machine guns and rifles to the young and able Ethiopian people and kill every last one, but they at this and any instant as the povertous in USA may as well get pistols and ammo at the supermarket and go into those forests and blow away every last Grey wolf by tommorrow also.

Fundamentally _the only ethical way of saving them_ is to use them as a pet, everything else is an insult upon the deaths of humans.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Right, trawling through this next installment

you think its OK to make money breeding Wolves & Hybrids, by what ever means, dont you?

we should be intelligent enough NOT to want to dominate an animal which should be living free, its not Humane to treat a Wolf like a dog.

have you ever heard of the late John Aspinall??? he had captive Wolves, he befriended & respected them & he treat them like WOLVES,
i named my husky Noushka after one of his she Wolves, she was a Great Friend to Aspinall.

Aspinall's zoo's (Howletts & port lymn), breed rare canids, Dholes, African hunting dogs etc, their aim is to one day (if its ever possible) return them to the wild. They are kept in massive enclosures living in packs, THEIR needs are whats important!!! 

you know that "Dingone" thing youre quoting...you wrote that didnt you!!! LOL


you dont need 1000 animals to stop it going extinct, i'll do a bit of research but i think its 100, obviously depending on the gene pool.
but BFF know what they need to ensure survival of the Ethiopean Wolf, unlike YOU!!


----------



## Guest (Apr 28, 2009)

i need time to digest all this again lol

Its like reading a foreign language! - will come back to this when i have time to organise my thoughts and do a proper reply. I have housework to get on with, lunch and dinner to prepare and a poorly pup, so i may be some time. 


have to agree with Noushka though, you did write the dingoone.pdf didnt you... go on.... admit it...


----------



## EmzieAngel (Apr 22, 2009)

I find this all frustrating, she's going on about cattle dogs being aggressive, when there are dogs being bred domestically and they are aggressive too.
I'm not sure if many people have had experience with Border Collies, but they can naturally be aggressive even when socialised and trained properly and they haven't been bred with wild dogs.


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

*Note: I'm a man.*



> Its like reading a foreign language!


Any higher concepts that require extra defining take something to digest.



> i need time to digest all this again lol


Don't tell me that science PDF of the Wolf genetics took seconds to read or that it was simple enough.

* Shared with all 
means control was possible without the initial master/mistress
e.g. they could be told to sit , come back , put in the car and taken away for days
with no danger

2 x x-breed Blue Cattle dogs both mums (themother one i could control, both bitches)
and a sausage dog mongrel that had kelpie in it.
2 x Border Collies actually also (both were actualy parents really shared among all)
Black Dingo(mine at the time the but Shared with all)
and a Red Cattle dog bitch(mums, Shared with all)
and a sausage dog mongrel type.
Plus two offspring Cattle dog x dingo(dads was the male one, Shared with all).
and a pure Kelpie bitch.

A Golden retr.x Labrador retr.(reject guide dog)
presently is not mine i , i have little - no control , just come here. I do not 
live there since 1994 anyhow.



> ever heard of the late John Aspinall


I'm sure scientists, translators and lawyers together know how to save the Ethiopian wolf. Its such a pity someone else cannot realise that if we were to all think and copy only people before us and their outdated data we would never improve and progress.
Note: Not only did i write Dingone.pdf (which shows your ability to absorb difficult conceptds for use is not good), i also wrote software of over 15000 (fifteen thousand lines) that has at present over 400 downloads 4 months(a conservative estimate from adding the various source sites for download . many freeware on the net never shift to that except from years).


----------



## Guinevere13 (Mar 31, 2008)

nicephotog said:


> Because we are human and _because whether in God or in Nature, *there is
> a right over animals and their lives by humans *specifically "no matter
> what anyone may think could drag human value down to that of an animal"._
> 
> ...


----------



## Guest (Apr 28, 2009)

lmao guinevere i cant blobby you i need to spread it around!

Have fun with the paint!


----------



## Gordo (Mar 2, 2009)

Ok, so you're against the extinction of these wild animals, very admirable (I think we can all agree on that point). But, to state that the best way to save these beautiful creatures is to remove them from their natural habitats and bring them into captivity is just a hateful idea. 
Humans have already done enough to decimate the natural populations of many wild creatures. The answer is actually to reinstate the open ranges/forests, etc. where these animals romed freely and protect them in the wild (big game reserves in Africa, for example). 
Bringing wild creatures into populated area or hybridising them is NOT the answer. I really don't understand how you can believe that it is. Your point about economic conditions being the answer to saving these animals is also wrong (just think about the Ivory trade and its decimation to the elephant population and how regulation has helped arrest the population decline).
OK, I haven't stated any facts and this is my opinion. I hope it's readable, I have tried to use correct punctuation to make it easier to understand .


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

I think ive blobbed everyone in this thread except the OP.

I think its pointless trying to talk to someone who THINKS they know what they are on about, but is obviously lacking basic common sense and practicality.

They fail to write with any correct form of grammar and punctuation, and fill their posts with inane and pointless stories.

The fact remains that NO scientist/conservationist who was worth a damn, would condone what the op is suggesting. The whole concept is preposterous.
The OP obviously has some superiority complex, where he believes that animals are only here for our pleasure/use, and that in itself says a lot about them as a person. 

Btw, neither Kelpies or Cattle Dogs are hybrids. Ive had experience of both breeds.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

hey Nonnie ive blobbed him!!....LMAO for entertaining & astounding me with his illegible replys:thumbup:

i think im gunna send a friends request now!:yikes:


----------



## Guinevere13 (Mar 31, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> hey Nonnie ive blobbed him!!....LMAO for entertaining & astounding me with his illegible replys:thumbup:
> 
> i think im gunna send a friends request now!:yikes:


You are mad!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Guinevere13 said:


> You are mad!


I am:yesnod


----------



## Shazach (Dec 18, 2008)

:::::
Sorry can't constructively comment, cause can't understand!
Daft to put anything really - Sorry...


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

> Guinevere13
> quote me nicephotog: ..."In the United States you could easily attract someone to murder you if you
> made heavier statements about puppy farmers,"people gotta eat and pay bills"...
> Guinevere13: Still doesn't make it right.


This should have been written and explained better, this demonstration of human ethical value of to survive against the value of a lower rank / lower order being(as they are referred to in science often enough).
It does have some excuse that people puppy farm, whether it is valid or that is ever closed down. The responsibility is to human survival first.



> Guinevere13
> quote me nicephotog: ..."horrible,horrible,horrible gold leaf jewel encrusted waiting stool, with all the Canadian salmon serves and lean pet beef and milk, never again simply horrid, horrid, water....
> Guinevere13: What are you on??? a) it doesn't make sense and b) it isn't even good English.


What of the wealthy buying or owning wolves then catering for their every needs particularly?



> The OP obviously has some superiority complex,


No, you are committing offensive public derrogation of perfectly constructive and sensible logic that is based on scientific fact and experience.
Discontinue , because _*you have actually quite visibly and simply broken the law, and worse it appears, inside Britain and Britains Commonwealths where it may be held accountable with no or without request for rightfully empowered legal authoritive force to intervene.*_



> where he believes that animals are only here for our pleasure/use, and that in itself says a lot about them as a person.


That comment is only unproductive public slander and again a derrogaion of the value of the reasoning stated and presented.
And here is my 15000 lines of Application software in another context /complex(perhaps a god complex) , 
SUcommanderXer Last Pre-Beta



> Ok, so you're against the extinction of these wild animals, very admirable (I think we can all agree on that point). But, to state that the best way to save these beautiful creatures is to remove them from their natural habitats and bring them into captivity is just a hateful idea.


No(as usual). I said that's _the surplus levels(the overflow reserve safety-catch) in the wild to make / create of them, then_ both the surplus and the personal keepers-breeders(rigid seperated(protection tactic) external reserve direct managed safety-catch) can do their produce p/kg touts' oaths' at whos is the best.
It is unethical and irresponsible to aquire money for such projects that are bound finitely by such immense chance of success when immediate techniques such as keeping/mas distributed keeping(for this particular creature) are known to at least be able to produce a recoverable number and enough protection to say that fair and sensible action against the danger will be averted. 
Producing more animals back into the gunfire is not.Were you environment farming?



> Guinevere13
> Now you are insulting me.


No, you do not have enough respect for human life and its own value.

Now i'll have some fun committing deranged logic as an example that proves it all as right what i say, and can only be accepted.
I know they had a problem of excessive numbers of Australaian aborigines murdered by being hung in police cells in the outback, but you are saying you(plural) rung the police and had them hung in their cells for _*selfishly(or selfish as you like accuracy) exploiting the environment *_*because they ate dingos(Canis Lupus Dingo) for thousands of years*.
Stop being a joke against what i am saying and allow scientists to speak for themselves.

_ps: What you do on the Canadian indians , Gunga din in India Paki?_

I know what i am talking about both by experience and by study, though my stream is not wild canids or domestic ones.

_also had:_ 1 x Golden Retriever(rated possibly the safest breed) when i was an infant for a few years. Sassy, she was controlable by children.

http://nicephotog-jsp.net/Dingone.pdf

*I DO NOT BELEIVE THIS THREAD CAN GET ANY MORE SENSIBLE AND PRODUCTIVE, BYE ALL, AND LUCK!*


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

ITS STILL GOBBLEDYGOOK!!!ut: 


"Destroy all Pitbulls & Rottweilers"........how Intelligent!!!ut: 


GO ON, ZOOM OFF IN YOUR SPACESHIP!!!! GOODBYE!!!!!ut: ut: ut:


----------



## waggytailsstore (Mar 22, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> ITS STILL GOBBLEDYGOOK!!!ut:
> 
> "Destroy all Pitbulls & Rottweilers"........how Intelligent!!!ut:
> 
> GO ON, ZOOM OFF IN YOUR SPACESHIP!!!! GOODBYE!!!!!ut: ut: ut:


I've followed this thread and yes definitely different planet:nonod:


----------



## Guinevere13 (Mar 31, 2008)

nicephotog said:


> It does have some excuse that people puppy farm, whether it is valid or that is ever closed down. The responsibility is to human survival first.
> 
> *There is never an excuse for exploitation of any creatures (including humans)*
> 
> ...


If, by this, you mean your audience knows you are talking rubbish, then yes you are correct. Good bye.  (Ooops my replies have come out in his quote, mine are the sensible ones in bold!)


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Guinevere13 said:


> If, by this, you mean your audience knows you are talking rubbish, then yes you are correct. Good bye.  (Ooops my replies have come out in his quote, mine are the sensible ones in bold!)


Guinevere we Know which are your replies!...LMAO


----------



## Guest (Apr 29, 2009)

BYEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE 



phew!


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

Does this mean im going to get arrested?


----------



## Guinevere13 (Mar 31, 2008)

Nonnie said:


> Does this mean im going to get arrested?


It depends on if he is allowed out of the loony bin to make a complaint.  Oops I might be too now 

Noushka05 - how did you know it was me?!?


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Guinevere13 said:


> It depends on if he is allowed out of the loony bin to make a complaint.  Oops I might be too now
> 
> Noushka05 - how did you know it was me?!?


cos youre not very fluent in Gobbledygook!!:cornut:


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Nonnie said:


> Does this mean im going to get arrested?


Nonnie you'll have to go on the run!!


----------



## Guinevere13 (Mar 31, 2008)

noushka05 said:


> cos youre not very fluent in Gobbledygook!!:cornut:


Note to self MUST TRY HARDER! 

I hope I don't have to run too cos I am rubbish at sports!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Guinevere13 said:


> Note to self MUST TRY HARDER!
> 
> I hope I don't have to run too cos I am rubbish at sports!


Maybe you could ask the op for some lessons!


----------



## Badger's Mum (Mar 23, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> Maybe you could ask the op for some lessons!


No come and stay at mine.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

christine c said:


> No come and stay at mine.


dont tell me you can translate Christine!:thumbup:


----------



## Badger's Mum (Mar 23, 2009)

noushka05 said:


> dont tell me you can translate Christine!:thumbup:


yes i can but not alloud to talk it tho. basically
it mean's his talking crap


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

christine c said:


> yes i can but not alloud to talk it tho. basically
> it mean's his talking crap


.....:lol::lol:


----------



## raindog (Jul 1, 2008)

Phew!!! Just been catching up with this thread. It's a shame really, that Nicephotog does not seem to be capable of expressing him/herself in simple, plain English as I am sure that some of his/her points, while I might disagree with them, are interesting and challenging.
The problem is that he/she writes as if his/her first language isn't English and that his/her English was learned from a Physics textbook or a Technical Manual. His posts read like the translations you get in instructions for the operation of goods made in Hong Kong - It's English, Jim, but not as we know it!

Mick


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

Quote: Winston Churchill

Sure I am of this, that you have only to endure to conquer. You have only to persevere to save yourselves.

If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.

I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat.

_An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. _

_Without tradition, art is a flock of sheep without a shepherd. Without innovation, it is a corpse. _ (conventional wildlife conservation , _however we're talking canids_)

_*The English never draw a line without blurring it.*_

_*A fanatic is one who cant change his mind and wont change the subject. *_

_There is no finer investment for any community than putting milk into babies. _ (Ethiopian wolves)

_The problems of victory are more agreeable than the problems of defeat, but they are no less difficult. _ (Ethiopian wolves)

_The latest refinements of science are linked with the cruelties of the Stone Age. _ (Ethiopian wolves _...if you will..._)

It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations. The quotations, when engraved upon the memory, give you good thoughts. They also make you anxious to read the authors and look for more.


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

I feel like I've been mind raped.

What was all that about lol


----------



## sequeena (Apr 30, 2009)

And since when did Winston Churchill get involved??

Leave the poor man alone, he's probably turning in his grave!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Mick where are you???

im not very good at History

this is theplan to save the Ethiopean Wolf.......they are looking at a captive breeding program, the facilities will be in Ethiopea, they will eventually release some captive bred Wolves in exchange for Wild Wolves to ensure genetic flow among them.

The Ethiopean authorities need to step up appropriate park management with support from the International community. The Bale mountains remain the best refuge for the Ethiopian Wolf, it is hoped the EW will become a flagship species which will trigger renewed efforts to conserve the alfroalpine ecosystem.

can you tell me in more detail what you think is the best way to secure the EW's future????


you know the "FANATIC" sentence....youre referring to yourself arnt you! lol


----------



## Guest (May 4, 2009)

wow....... i just caught up on this and it gave me a headache... I have never seen someone manage to say so much whilst saying so little - although seemingly having your head up your own backside must be a dark and confusing place to attempt to write any meaningful argument.


And I am degree educated in a Science/Engineering field so it cant be that i have inferior intelligence, as the OP suggested.


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

If you do not like being told(there is also).....

General Authoritarianism:
History , advertising and its polarity to its instituted concept, propaganda, perception by peoples through their community bodies deduced from anthropology, biological and architectural spatial mechanics relative management impositions,and Hedonism' place with Authoritanarianism

But consider logic , and sense, these animals require help not ignorance and uninovative management planning.

Note, you said a rude words worth of hypocrasy you despise, _but do not we all?_ _"captive breeding program"_.

*The OP* here suggests he knows some engineering and science too, such as Avagadros number for calculating M and statistical input argument variation calculations for accuracy, and is a computer scientist, and has a brother that is PhD of Biochenistry and a Father that is a PhD of Political science as educational rationalisations worth for you to consider.
Not simply dreaming an absurdity of proposition that did not found on fact relating prevention of extinction.

*Canids(the only living creature with this attribute) can easily adapt to living with and being controlled in a family of humans(meaning wolves Lupus).*


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

theres no hypocrisy from me..i said all along if these animals are to be bred in captivity they should be in naturalistic enclosures, like the Iberian Wolves of the I.W.R.C
you on the other hand think its ok for wealthy d...heads to keep them, dont you?


get real!! Wolves dont easily adapt to living & being "CONTROLLED" in a family of humans

& the 1st part of your post is more Nonsense(well it is to me!)


----------



## Nonnie (Apr 15, 2009)

Why do i feel like this thread is doing nothing but going in circles?

Should have read it last night when i couldnt sleep


----------



## Guest (May 4, 2009)

HERE WE GO AGAIN!

OK firstly:

There is NO such word as UNINOVATIVE. Innovative (innovation) being to think outside the box with new *successful* ways and means of achieving a goal. There is no such word.

What you are saying then is that your theory for a captive breeding and eventual domestication of the all wild canids would be successful. This could not be the case.

Not every member of a species would survive in the type of captivity you are suggesting. The red wolf being a prime example. The red wolf is suprisingly difficult to breed in captivity to such an extent that now there are around 250 (as of 2006)members of the species in both the wild and captivity. This is a very low number considering captive breeding programmes have been in place since the 70's. The captive breeding programme although somewhat sucessful, in 2002 the only wolf's left in the wild were born there, from captive bred parents. Add tothat that as all of the red wolfs in the wild are now descended from the captive breeding programmes (it was declared extinct in 1980 in the wild) the black coat type of the red wolf is now totally extinct. There is a limited genepool for these canids, and there are also problems of hybridisation between coyotes. These wolfs simply do not like captivity, they do not thrive and therefore do not breed easily.

There may be individual animal excpetions to the rule, yet from only breeding from those you would be further damaging the species and the already limited genepool.Thus by your interfearance adding to the decline of the species. If you only breed from those that are 1)willing to breed in captivity, 2)show the signs of an ability to domesticate your genepool will become smaller and smaller. How will that help the species survive in the wild.


----------



## Guinevere13 (Mar 31, 2008)

I could list my educational qualifications, along with many on here. However I am quite satisfied with the size of my....intelect. I have no wish to get into a pi**ing competition with someone who thinks it is ok to keep wolves as pets, which is all this drivel boils down to.

Quotes for fun 

His speeches leave the impression of an army of pompous phrases moving over the landscape in search of an idea. Sometimes these meandering words would actually capture a struggling thought and bear it triumphantly a prisoner in their midst until it died of servitude and overwork. 

Senator W McAdoo on Warren G Harding.

Can't act. Can't sing. Slightly bald. Can dance a little. 

Anonymous on Fred Astaire.

Enjoy


----------



## Guest (May 4, 2009)

Guinevere13 said:


> I could list my educational qualifications, along with many on here. However I am quite satisfied with the size of my....intelect. I have no wish to get into a pi**ing competition with someone who thinks it is ok to keep wolves as pets, which is all this drivel boils down to.
> 
> Quotes for fun
> 
> ...


.............. I think i love you :blush2: You just won this thread.


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

> UNINOVATIVE. Innovative (innovation)


my bad....



> billyboysmammy :
> The red wolf being a prime example. The red wolf is suprisingly difficult to breed in captivity to such an extent that now
> .............................
> are now descended from the captive breeding programmes (it was declared extinct in 1980 in the wild) the black coat type of the red wolf is now totally extinct.
> ...


This is more of a confession that i'm right, captive systems simply dump an intellegent creature into a giant pen, and they are expected to see that as having some meaning in life with their urges from instinct to move and play e.t.c.
The principle with being in a pet type system is the inter-species cooperative relationship that will even be hostile dependent before becoming too damningly bored or worried or simply not effective.

http://www.nicephotog-jsp.net/dingone.html
For 99% of people they can get one as a pup supplied by registered scientific breeders(Dingoes).
Me, myself and a severely small minority of people are able to walk in,walk out(to that effect) and take one away full grown gnashing and snarling and _quote (Warner Brother character Sammiddy Sam): "whoa " the "mule!"_s attitude(with constant offers of mildly sugared(glucose) milk apart the main meals to keep strength up to it).

In a human driven relationship it can operate similar to activity programs that are used on patients in hospitals(Alike occupational therapy), It won't just sit there and pine until it dies, of can occur in that situation(plenty of synthetically produced animals) with other wolves around it, as much their keeper may only be "just that(a keeper)" for the red wolf, not their human Alpha and playmate. Moreover, dependent how long it is required to play and the required safety equipment being available, is how long any each day will have at cost to be emotionally cared for. This last point is why pet keeping of them out of a forest often operates perfectly well if they are wanted.
The other option is extincting them (sarcasm).



> There may be individual animal excpetions to the rule, yet from only breeding from those you would be further damaging the species and the already limited genepool.


For around the third or fourth major time DO NOT INSINUATE:
I did not state hybridisation(x breeding wild dogs from purity) was a method of replenishment or any use of keeping animals pure. The only point at which i referred to hybridisation as useful is for ecological purpose after extiction has actually occurred.
I did not state hybridisation(x breeding wild dogs from purity) was acceptable as totally deliberate.



> show the signs of an ability to domesticate your genepool will become smaller and smaller


_genepools_ and their clades of wild dogs do not domesticate, they are what they are, and they only change by evolution.


----------



## Guest (May 5, 2009)

Right

Where in my above post did I mention anything about hybrids - apart from a small comment on the red wolf's immediate danger from coyote hybrids in the wild.

My point on the genepool still stands. If you only breed from animals that show the right behaviours and appear tamer then your genepool will diminish. The Silver Fox experiement proves this. In only 7 generations there was already a marked difference between the behaviour and genetics of their wild bred cousins. Now almost 50 years later the domesticated (pet) foxes are missing some 2740 different genes compared to the wild population. Therefore my theory of breeding only from the selected few stands true.

The principle is simple. It is using the simple genetics of line breeding in any other dog line (or cats), you select the traits you want to continue and breed only from animals carrying those traits, you also stop breeding from those who carry undesirable traits.

On top of the genetic differences from their wildbred cousins,there are some pretty major physical changes that took place during domestication. Remember these foxes were only ever selected for breeding by behaviour charts, not physical traits. The domesticated foxes started to show a more juvnile appearance upon maturity - wider skulls, tipped ears, higher set to tail. Then strangely coat changes became apparent, bi-colours and colour changes became the norm rather than the exception. Now - these foxes do breed in captivity readily (they are a fur farmed fox), any human interation isnt as stressful as it is for the red wolf.

to highligt the differences:








WILD silver fox








captive bred silver fox wildlife reserve.








top later fox, bottom early fox in experiement







Domesticated Silver foxes.

You can see that there isnt much difference in the appearance of the wild or captive bred foxes. Yet the domesticated foxes look very very different. The genepool is so much smaller and so recessive genes which would be an anomoly in the wild become the norm in the domestic population.

With regards to the red wolf - i fail to see how my previous example is proof that your experiment would be a success. They do not do well with human contact. They do not live in the traditional packs. Their pack consists of the adult breeding pair, and offspring. They mate for life, have small litters, and their offspring leave home at around 6months old. This isnt a good indication for living in a pack with humans! They dont go through the whole ALPHA OMEGA pack heirachy.


----------



## Guest (May 5, 2009)

nicephotog said:


> For around the third or fourth major time DO NOT INSINUATE:
> I did not state hybridisation(x breeding wild dogs from purity) was a method of replenishment or any use of keeping animals pure. The only point at which i referred to hybridisation as useful is for ecological purpose after extiction has actually occurred.
> I did not state hybridisation(x breeding wild dogs from purity) was acceptable as totally deliberate.


I did not mention hybridisation at all. I was talking about domesticating a pure species.



> _genepools_ and their clades of wild dogs do not domesticate, they are what they are, and they only change by evolution.


Yes they do, if selective breeding for certain behaviours or certain traits then certain genes will become more common and others lost.

If you would be wanting to make this financially viable then it would need to have 1) quick results 2) large litters 3)enough people wanting the pups.

Th silver fox experiement showed that the fox's could be considered domesticated by the 7th generation. These were selectively bred for their behaviour traits.

If you are saying that you would not be employing selective breeding, then how please do you expect to domesticate them?

Or are you simply planning on breeding as many as possible (puppy farms - you are quick to defend them), and passing them off as pups to unsuspecting public, who then have the task of raising a wild animal as a pet?

Or are you saying that you would hybridise them (still selective breeding) with domestic dogs, to give the wild look without the wild temperament. Thats worked so well for the wolf dogs so far hasnt it!


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

Great posts BBM!!!!

ive always been interested in that fur farm experment & basically it proves you probably need 1000's of animals so you have enough to select the tiny minority which are relatively "tame" to begin domestication.

watch this video on it nicephotog.....YouTube - Russian "Tame Foxes"


----------



## Guest (May 5, 2009)

Just wanted to add to anyone who has the inclination to read this thread,

Although i have cited references with regards to the domestication of the silver fox, i still believe that it is wrong. Just because something can be done, doesnt mean it should.

Yes the tame foxes are beautiful, as are the fennec foxes gaining popularity as pets, however i still firmly believe that these animals need to be in the wild. If they are to be kept, they should always be kept in naturalistic enclosures, with the view of education an captive breeding for release.

right now i have that off my chest, here are some fun quotes for you topdog 



> Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe. Albert Einstein





> Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus handicapped. Elbert Hubbard





> Nobody can be so amusingly arrogant as a young man who has just discovered an old idea and thinks it is his own. Sydney J Harris





> All change is not growth; as all movement is not forward. Ellen Glasgow


----------



## nicephotog (Apr 23, 2009)

> This isn't a good indication for living in a pack with humans! They dont go through the whole ALPHA OMEGA pack heirachy.


Neither does familiaris. But wolves do, and that is effectively replaceable with a human handler as Alpha at the least, and with some work on relationships at the guidence and dispute specialist centre with some spouse pair anger management.



> Therefore my theory of breeding only from the selected few stands true.


noone was disputing that, what you put into something is what you can get out of it.
Well, what can i say? RES IPSA DES.
Or have i missed the summaril point of that piece.



> With regards to the red wolf - i fail to see how my previous example is proof that your experiment would be a success. They do not do well with human contact.


You only have me intensely intrigued at the compound(geographical) - compound management , its location , structure and layout , materials(chemistry) , consistencies(comparing the animals and their problems) with other red wolf compound locations for problems and in time with season or circumstance , or ritual(inside 24 hours).

It may be a point to assess or re-assess how much was originally known to build the enclosure, for what they now know from their research, And finally any standard living requirements - activities such as relationships with other living beings(e.g. watching too much television , too much beer , loud rock music e.t.c).

Finally, how the human contact occurs, whether that is handling or pure attempt to be alpha(why a human alpha would want the dog food i do not know, the wolves do not know, that could have starved the red wolf to death to sit there after the handler as Alpha was gone. He'd never eat some of their food(chuckle)).



> If you are saying that you would not be employing selective breeding, then how please do you expect to domesticate them?


No. Just breeding for their continuation but using an output numbers and placement management system to preserve the species quite absolutely whole, NO domestication or trait loss, i was aware of internal genetic diversity, but for most that is handled by numbers and low incest percentage% in the breeding just like Kelpies or anything else has an inbreeding index percentage% if bred carefully(cannot really occur if danger level of the reservoir is 500 male 500 female - my preferred size 200 male 800 female MINIMUM bottom level).



> i continue to believe that it is wrong. Just because something can be done, doesnt mean it should.


But in effect you do comprehend that, A) there is no reservoir, B) That's too dangerous to use the unbounded wild for a reservoir (Just read your / a countries customs service department information and news, and also go to CITES about wildlife smuggling and www.traffic.org ) .Its quite simple, get as many people involved , carefully as can be educated and personally keep them. As you say that is not particularly a good situation in mass handling compounds.
But canids(only and reasonably no other animal for size and intellect and compatibility) are a different point relating people.
Maybe some real regulatory(management system not legislation) requires to be constructed to acclimatise both people and the Lupus pup / cub together too, but i do not finally see that with what is known of the animal that they would be able to be kept simply by anyone, as opposed to whether anyone has a legal dispensed right or not. Blocking it legally is fatal upon them i believe because animals such as the one in the ANNOVA article would be instantly destroyed or crowded into a zoo if it could be kept(economics willing).
_It hurts them(*wolves*) not_ i believe for people who wish to be involved to keep them. It is better than disinterest in a topical argument that will never really be seen or heard because it is only for the experts, because that it will only be if and while that is legislated.
Ask someone simple and ordinary(as most are) or someone better able and educated to know about and care for over a million species at one time. If wolves are not kept, they are the one in the million. Try getting people each to donate 1,000,000 cents ($10,000 .00 ), 1 for each species e.g. , the wolf is now any one of a lump of unusable uncomprehendable non seeable information only. So who would be interested in that particularly when they have these boundary traversal problems and socialisation - food finding problems of getting near to humans.

_These points i am making are extremely real and not avoidable. If your boat was sailing toward rocks would you try to sail through them or would you do what you could because you are able and turn and sail away(given that you can).
I think all of you need to supply complex arguments, step by step why you do not want or think some things._



> Yes they do, if selective breeding for certain behaviours or certain traits then certain genes will become more common and others lost.


While that is what occurs in selective breeding, it is not actually impossible for that(gene pool) to be kept diverse by one step forward two steps back principle on human canid acceptance response selection(likes people and hangs around , but also does its ecological job well).
The interesting point of it being the two ways of seeing canid behavior using wolves finally.
"Flight distance theory", contains a point about gene pools and selection for breeding.
Flight distance theory is a little bunkum at truly deciding how something has occurred(re domestication). The Silver Fox experiment is a better one for what is called domestication, however, finally has no other proof of effect for breeds except its trait loss point that also begins to show physically in the offspring.
If the _silver foxes experiment shows anything regarding the origin of domestication and canis breeds_, it shows that domestication is purely artificial _and not representative of that is considered by_ ecology(as a present physical and real whole associate evolution) and environment to be a current(present time - moment - now) requirement evolutionary status, and therefore a deformity that is too subtle to simply pick(A bit like you say, simply because you can do something does not mean you should).
"Flight distance theory"
1) Tamest and most dependent or useless unable to survive in the wild alone(this proposes they lost their fear of humans' presence by dependence on human presence).
2) Its opposite version bold Aggressive - cooperative theory , useful to cooperate with for hunting and teaching signals and bargaining share in kill system(this one proposes they lost their fear of humans' presence by dependence on human presence).
Both the same result but radical differences of means to end. Number 2 is proven as an undisputable point by film of aboriginals in Australia in the 1940's.

For histories perspective of dogs(familiaris) and gene pool obtainence, A passage of subtlety in the Bundahishn is how dogs have little evidence through time in archeology as to how they developed. In principle, states it was made to protect flocks of sheep.
Creatures such as civet-cat and hedgehog are in it. The first to be seen as a dog by science in evolution is species named Tomarctus around(vaguely) *30 - 25 million years back //timeline corrected//* (For rough purpose means "all but a bear").

_Bundahishn
"10. The third genus is that of the five-dividing paw, of which the dog is the largest, and the civet-cat the least. 11. The fourth genus is the flying, of which the griffin of three natures is the largest, and the chaffinch the least. 12. The fifth genus is that of the water, of which the Kar fish is the largest, and the Nemadu the least........
........................
(THIS MID PIECE 15 IS FOR AMUSEMENT ABOUT SHEEP)15. Second, five species of sheep, that with a tail, that which has no tail, the dog-sheep, the wether, and the Kurishk sheep, a sheep whose horn is great; it possesses a grandeur like unto a...........
........................ 
19. Sixth, ten species of dog, the shepherd's dog, the village-dog which is the house-protector, the blood-hound, the slender hound, the water-beaver which they call the water-dog, the fox, the ichneumon (rasu), the hedgehog which they call 'thorny-back,' the porcupine, and the civet-cat; of which, two species are those accustomed to burrows, one the fox and one the ichneumon; and those accustomed to jungle are such as the porcupine which has spines on its back, and the hedgehog which is similar."_

In human living situations as people moved from temporary hut system materials to more solid buildings that required more and complex difficult hygenic care(although from 4000 - 20 000 years previous e.g.) they were not able to keep dogs unless they committed better training and special care, hence or thus few dogs until animals of alike or them(dogs) had cult status to keep in the community.
The use for, and remains of dogs, would for most be in settlements, requiring fossilisation to find them, not in permanent communities.



> billyboysmammy:
> ...and passing them off as pups to unsuspecting public, who then have the task of raising a wild animal as a pet?


That is quote above another example of insinuative slander .
Your comment i have quoted above is well proven to be insinuative slander by my publically available article ( http://www.nicephotog-jsp.net/Dingone.pdf ) *that expresses both my opinion and facts with regard to preservation and conservation of wolves particularly the "Warrigal" , the "Australian wild dog", "Canis Lupus Dingo", "Thai Dingo" , "Papua New Guinea Singing dog", "White footed Asian Wolf" and "Canis Lupus Pallipes".*
It may not have clearly stated about my position on wolf-dog hybrids but much of that is only to contrast the point of wolves as a canid in relation to human usage and perceptions.
By people being aware that is a concept of an animal as a pet with a large quantity of its danger removed by breeding technique (people buy them for their appearence), they become interested in a legitemised version of canid alike a wolf as a pet and always are reminded of the real animal from its appearence.
In some cases of wolf-dog hybrids the genetics is a recipe of breeding only intended to create a breed of dog for a specialist use, such as kelpies and Cattle dogs.
However although, to be conservative of conservation claims by science , government or groups and knowing the outcome of the wilds' systematics of protection, _*it is hoped people will bother to learn enough about wolves or their local wolves species as personal keepers(animal husbandary context not enclosure - physical restraint bounds context) to then keep them in likeness to a pet as part of a reservoir as anything else does that does make money (of is the pinnacle of success of promotion and management).*_

_There is no true mention or intention of deceiving people._
There is a paragraph or two written as humour relating advertising ethics, but that is intended and purely interpretable as humour.



> financially viable


*In capitalism, economic profit is the measure of success (I'm sorry, i have been informed to write that again... There is also Taxation)*. So, where possible, (but in ethical boundaries) it should be to attempt to commit forsight of how much can be made of the animal finally, by step by step management toward that to give it its own economic up-keep. It, as any species / sub species will be jostling for money for its up-keep.
Perhaps at some point these can stop being a loser for primary production and mining.
..."enough people wanting pups"... , well is some measure of success, but until either cattle dogs , kelpies or Border collies and a few gaurd dogs breeds , others cannot actually be said to get near being an actual economically viable system of earning a living by itself alone of keeping and breeding a breed.
I'm not aware of any commercial kennel ever "actually" managing that(sole living income p / annum) except their probably would be in the US and probably for gaurd dogs.

*One important peice of legislation to make common through all countries for wolves* would be to *never allow them to be used as gaurd dogs of the savage type*. That's not based on stereotypicalism of their aggression, rather the point of their psychological survival mechanism inbuilt instinct directive requiring to be in one piece to commit sudden aggression for the point of violence to make a kill, particularly more deep and complex of that one , particularly when others commit a *"call"* to attack, its based on the same reason about _Bull Terriers and Rottwiellers that has caused them dubbed *"murderers dogs"*_ because _wolves are used that way by ecology in nature _as these breeds that are 10:1 of the familiaris in killing people(gaurd dogs) are often found to be being used that way as cover up, pity for those animals that trick is old as history but criminals are ignorant and lazy and never realise that has occurred for even thousands of years. It's probably ruined 2 good breeds now to make them as unstable and psychotic as possible apart the Doberman.

http://www.nicephotog-jsp.net/dingone.html


----------

