[serviceberry]

I find the self-domestication theory quite plausible for cats, but I'm having a hard time accepting it for wolves. Why would human tribes tolerate wolves in close proximity?

Small cats are largely harmless and get rid of pests. Wolves compete for the same food sources, kill children, and are otherwise a nuisance.

Granted, selective breeding of captive animals also doesn't jibe with what we know about the Stone Age, but we don't know all that much.

[SJC_Hacker]

> Why would human tribes tolerate wolves in close proximity?

Wolves will scavenge if they are hungry enough, and will eat food humans may have found unfit, such as bones. So they may have come to view humans as a source of food, but were too timid to attack, and followed around hunter/gatherer tribes. The wolves would be little more than an annoyance, if the humans even notice them at all. Generally the wolf is going to notice you before you notice it - they have superior sense of smell and hearing. In an environment with heavy vegetation (i.e. forest), thats going to count for alot more than vision.

On the other side of the coin, its possible the humans also followed around the wolves who would have been superior trackers with better sense of smell/hearing, mutually beneficial hunts may have been possible.

Eventually, a tolerance could have developed and the tribe found the wolves useful for things like, keeping away more dangerous predators such as large cats/bears/etc. or even rival packs of wolves. They would also be useful as a alarm system. Given enough time, the more sociable wolves, yet less dangerous, wolves may have selected for. There is a theory that dogs are basically wolves whose mental developed stopped at the younger ages, and lack independence like adult wolves have.

[ang_cire]

Wolves keep away other animals, and are more alert than humans. If I'm a Paleolithic human, having a wolf nearby that isn't eating my kids precisely because I give it snacks instead, and that is going to just naturally ward off bears or other pests, even in the dark of night, seems like a great win.

[cantrecallmypwd]

Consider the megafauna situation of 20-30k BP: huge, scary animals more dangerous than wolves. It might've started as a temporary alliance against other apex predators.

[ceejayoz]

> Why would human tribes tolerate wolves in close proximity?

You don't start with the adults.

You kill the adults and raise the pups.

Even today, there are wolf sanctuaries with wild wolves who've become quite friendly and acclimated to their carers. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gePE-_lrJUU

[542354234235]

>You kill the adults and raise the pups.

You are talking about the second domestication period, not the first. The first domestication period was not intentional by humans. It was that some wolve packs scavenged scraps from around human settlements, and so were in slightly closer contact. Over generations, the humans and wolves became slightly more comfortable with each other and humans started seeing some benefits from the proximity (early warning system, additional deterrent against other predators, etc.). This likely reinforced the developing relationship and prompted some humans to occasionally actively feed scraps/leftovers to the least skittish wolves, which again over generations, led to some wolves being close to what we would call “friendly” towards humans.

[serviceberry]

Right, but the argument here isn't that humans domesticated wolves, but that wolves self-domesticated themselves (i.e., humans tolerated adult wolves in close proximity).

[ceejayoz]

That’s the last bit of my comment. People get adopted by wolf packs at times. Both approaches probably worked for different groups.

[NewJazz]

Hunting parties may have cooperated with wolves to route or take down prey. Humans have smarts and persistence, but they aren't sprinters. A wolf can run 30-40 mph.