When did dogs become our best friends?

https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/when-did-dogs-become-our-best-friends

by diodorus • 2 years ago

146 191 2 years ago

INTPenis• 2 years ago

On this topic I saw this great documentary called "Man's first friend" from 2008.[1].

Also speaking of northern Italy, as a dog owner, I am fully behind this[2] proposal to DNA test dogs and punish anyone leaving dog poop on the streets.

1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=talBvZ5x8sY&t=4882s

2. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/17/italian-provin...

xandrius6• 2 years ago

In a low-trust country such as Italy, I'd say that it would be useful.

Also it would depend on the specific commune and not a country-wide requirement.

ethanbond5• 2 years ago

Also necessary in NYC which I don’t really feel is low-trust in general.

bryanrasmussen• 2 years ago

Denmark is generally considered a high trust country, but it happens often enough I would like to see it.

smugglerFlynn• 2 years ago

Isn’t solving trust issues with further mistrust leads to an even lower trust in the end? (genuinely interested because “low-trust/high-trust communities” concept is a topic I know nothing about.)

gadders3• 2 years ago

DNA testing would presumably help cut down on dog theft, which was a big issue in the UK when puppy prices increased due to lockdown.

sph5• 2 years ago

I also enjoyed the probably not very historically accurate movie Alpha, about a prehistoric young man domesticating a wolf: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4244998/

hasty_pudding7• 2 years ago

The founding fathers would think that allowing the government to have a database on ANYTHING is a bad idea.

Plus dog poop is ecologically good for the environment and fertilizes nature.

ChoGGi2• 2 years ago

Concrete and asphalt don't need fertilizer.

nervousvarun2• 2 years ago

Apparently, dog poop is not an effective fertilizer and is considered harmful for grass?

Was news to me as a dog owner who allows our dog to do her business in the back yard (but would never allow it on a public walkway/area).

https://lawnlove.com/blog/is-dog-poop-bad-for-grass/

ryanianian• 2 years ago

It is absolutely not good for the environment. Your dog does not eat a local, natural diet. There are more dogs than could be locally and naturally sustained.

CalRobert4• 2 years ago

Dog poop can blind children and is horrible for the environment.

https://www.cdc.gov/parasites/toxocariasis/

https://www.popsci.com/environment/dog-poop-pollution/

vouaobrasil3• 2 years ago

First, I know a lot of people are very nice to their dogs, but...

I live in a large city, and based on the number of dogs locked away in apartments all day barking and bored to death with almost no stimulation, I figure dogs are certainly not the best friends of a lot of people. Instead, they are more like prisoners that illustrate the cruelness of humanity in general: these people use them as entertainment and care fairly little for their overall welfare.

mynameisvlad• 2 years ago

That’s an extremely harsh take considering those same owners likely do care a lot about their dogs and shower them with love and affection outside those 8 hours. You’re focusing on a single part of the experience in order to paint the whole thing in a negative light.

To put it another way, would they be better off being strays? I doubt it.

vouaobrasil3• 2 years ago

Extremely harsh? Many of these dogs are very smart. What about locking a human away for 8 hours with no internet, no books, no entertainment, nothing to do?

And it might be affection they give their dogs but it's not really love if they are so cruel. Besides, they wouldn't be strays if they were never bought, at least not a lot of them if the demand were lower, then so would the breeding and supply.

the_af• 2 years ago

To put it another way, would they be better off being strays? I doubt it.

Adopting a dog will probably do it good, but a lot of people are buying dogs from dog breeders (and then the mentioned behavior happens, dogs left alone to bark in apartments). Should dogs be purposefully bred as pets, only to be left alone for hours on end?

Arisaka1• 2 years ago

Me and my parents came to an agreement that we will not own a pet while we live in an apartment precisely because of this sentiment. I also disagree with the strawman the other comment presented: The alternative isn't to have the dog fight for survival on the streets as a stray. The alternative is to have the dog owned by a family that can actually provide it with the appropriate environment.

poloniculmov2• 2 years ago

Dogs are very social and they love to be with their humans, your pet is not going to be happier being left alone in the back yard than lounging on the couch with you.

rybosworld2• 2 years ago

That's a pretty extreme take.

Being unfit to raise a dog does not imply cruelty.

newsclues2• 2 years ago

Lived on a farm with a 100 acres a dog could roam freely in.

Live in a suburban house with a small back yard and a small dog doesn't like it and wants to roam.

Dogs are great in rural areas, in cities I think they suffer for the sake of humans.

matwood3• 2 years ago

Really depends on the dog. The problem is that people get high activity working dogs and then don't work them.

pookha• 2 years ago

Not always that simple. I have a giant doberman. I no-shit threw a frisbee for this doberman 72 times yesterday (and ran with her three miles). She gets more exercise than the sheltie I had as a kid that ran leash-free in the country. And if you dare leave her in the backyard her whine could emit high-pitch frequencies that shake glass. She's a city dog that would be lost in the country without a human to hang with.

sph5• 2 years ago

I strongly agree and it's apparent not everybody shares this opinion.

I grew up in the countryside in the middle of nowhere, my dog used to have an enormous backyard to run in, and was cheeky enough to have made a hole in the fence when that time of the year came and he really wanted to leave for a couple days at a time, either to sire some puppies, or to roll around in horse dung. We used a leash whenever we took him amidst civilization, otherwise he was used to just walking unleashed, with us (mostly getting impatient at how slow humans are), sniffing anything he wanted and peeing on every pole that stood in his path.

I miss him every day (died at 15 years old a happy and free half golden retriever mutt). I'd love another dog, but I know they're a type of animal that enjoys a large territory, freedom, as well as a social hierarchy. I will have to suffer with this hole inside of me until I am able to leave the city and offer a dog not only love, but large enough space to run around and not get bored to death.

Cats on the other hand, as long as they have food and are left alone, can happily live holed up in a flat. Thrive, I'm not sure, but they have much simpler needs than dogs.

temporarely2• 2 years ago

Cats on the other hand

are much more like humans - cat's dig urbanism, can hang out at a cafe for hours, sit on a couch watching the tube all day, they happily adapt.. So that' why we say "there's a cool cat" but you never hear anything about "cool dogs". So your theory is correct in my opinion: dogs are good rural friends and cats are good urban friends. There is also the matter of dog poop. Has anyone every complained on cat poop on their stoop? Or getting bitten by the neighbor's cat? Or being annoyed at the neighbor's mewing cat?

Now a cat on a farm, don't know about that. Wonder how that would work.

actionfromafar• 2 years ago

Some dogs really can handle modest exercise. I know a happy cocker spaniel who’s an apartment dweller. Gets a lot of human interaction with almost constant human companions, with about ten humans rotating in and out of the dogs life over a month. So, exercise wise, not too much except walks in the city and parks, but socially a very interesting life. I am sure a husky would go insane in the same circumstances. It also very much depends on the individual, so if you get a dog, find out as much as possible how it’s close relatives behave.

pvg2• 2 years ago

Eschew flamebait. Avoid generic tangents.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

scrapcode• 2 years ago

Unfortunately, this pet-owner energy mismatch extends to those who live in all types of environments. People will often seek a companion putting plenty of research into their looks, size, and how much they shed - without paying mind to the breed's temperament. I work with high-drive waterfowl retrievers that have seemingly endless energy and they can really start to act up without proper frequent exercise. They require multiple 20+ minute sessions of training/running per day that would be equivalent to many miles of running each session.

JohnBooty3• 2 years ago

I generally agree that cities and apartments aren't great places for dogs.

But a lot of dogs are rescues, and a lot of breeds are quite happy in apartments.

There are also a lot of mitigations possible. There are dog walkers and dog sitters who come by and walk the dogs during the daytime. You can have multiple dogs that keep each other company. Etc.

    based on the number of dogs locked away in apartments 
    all day barking and bored to death with almost no 
    stimulation

Respectfully, it seems like you don't know a lot about dogs?

A barking dog isn't necessarily distressed. In fact, they're probably not distressed: there are a lot of other ways that dogs show that.

They also like to sleep during the daytime. They sleep a lot in general. They are pretty adaptable to our schedules.

While I generally don't think we should be breeding dogs at all, the reality is that there are a lot of dogs who need homes (as well as homes who need dogs!) and in the majority of situations I think that getting dogs into homes with a loving family is preferable to euthanizing them.

antisthenes• 2 years ago

While I generally don't think we should be breeding dogs at all

What do you mean by this? If we don't breed dogs, in about 15 years or so, there will be no dogs left at all.

dazc• 2 years ago

I am not a lover of dogs, which some people seem to find offensive? Yet, people who are cruel to dogs are, generally, dog owners and not people like me who just give them a wide berth.

Anyone who thinks an animal enjoys being locked indoors all day with no understanding of why, or for how long it will be, is a much lesser person than me.

the_common_man• 2 years ago

They are pets and not friends

vouaobrasil3• 2 years ago

They are neither. They are living beings that we just happened to have modified through artificial selection to be our slaves.

walthamstow• 2 years ago

For a lot of dog owners, their dog is less a friend and more an Instagram cast member

lenerdenator• 2 years ago

Likely twice as old as written language.

https://www.livescience.com/stone-age-dog-burial.html

Abuse of a dog or cat is a crime against civilization itself.

8338550bff963• 2 years ago

I've made this argument many times and it always raises eyebrows and induces shrugs. We as a species co-evolved with some animals and not others. Our partnership with extends deep into the mists of pre-history. We and they have co-evolved to an extent to be better companions. Eating a dog is a profound betrayal unlike that of eating a horse. Come at me

bigbillheck• 2 years ago

We've got a pretty long-standing partnership with horses too.

callalex• 2 years ago

This is like arguing about if it’s better to regularly beat your sibling or your cousin. Just don’t beat anybody!

lukan4• 2 years ago

Compagnions and friends?

Maybe when we were nomads and the dogs roamed around freely around the tribe.

But most dogs today are locked in, most of the time and when they get outside, they are on a leash. Totally dependant on their human masters.

I don't think I would describe that relationship as a partnership.

Then there is the concept of breeding them, to establish certain "cute" traits, but cause great pain and misery to the animal:

https://de.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualzucht (german)

I would argue, the native american tribes, who also did eat their dogs, treated them better overall, than humanity does today on average. So many dogs bred for running around, are lucky today, if they get to walk around outside for more than 20 minutes. This I would call betrayal.

sph5• 2 years ago

I am OK with some cultures not eating some meats: pork for the muslims or jews, horse for some Western countries, sometimes rabbit. Where I'm from (Italy) we eat both horse and rabbits.

But I too draw the line at eating dogs and cats, except during extreme survival situations where it's eat your pet (or fellow human) to avoid starvation. I feel eating canids and felids as taboo as eating a primate, or eating a human.

matwood3• 2 years ago

I wouldn't eat a horse either, but otherwise agree. Dogs have evolved the skills to fit in human social structures. They really do become part of families.

Perceval• 2 years ago

Rats and cockroaches also co-evolved with humans. Is that a partnership that evokes similar sentimental feelings for you?

alephknoll• 2 years ago

https://www.livescience.com/stone-age-dog-burial.html

"Of note, it's unclear whether the dog died a natural death, or whether it was killed to be buried with its human. An analysis of its remains may reveal this mystery."

What are the odds that the dog died of natural causes at exactly the same time as the owner?

Abuse of a dog or cat is a crime against civilization itself.

That logic doesn't follow. If dogs predate civilization, then how could it be a crime against civilization? Your article is about dogs in primitive hunter gatherer societies. Not civilizations. Besides, many civilizations have thrived abusing dogs and cats. You might want to read what the bible says about 'unclean' dogs. Or why we have the saying 'there is more than one way to skin a cat'.

Or how 'civilizations' dispatched of dogs not too long ago.

https://archive.nytimes.com/cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/...

Not to mention the millions of cats/dogs that are 'euthanized' every year or the hundreds of million of cats and dogs that are castrated ( which people oddly don't consider to be abuse ). Heck, it's not hard to argue that imprisoning animals in your home as 'pets' is abuse.

If anything, civilization is an abuse against dogs and cats.

prmoustache4• 2 years ago

As a cyclist, I can't say dogs are my best friends. OTOH I have had great bonds with some cats.

Unfrozen06882• 2 years ago

You have stray dogs where you live or what? Cant say cycling has affected my views on dogs.

prmoustache4• 2 years ago

Lots of stray dogs around here in south of Spain. Also when I used to be a 12y old cycling in rural france that was pretty much the same, I was always prepared for a sprint whenever I would reach a farm.

In a sense it probably made me stronger but I can't say I build a friendship and a mutual sense of confidence with dogs.

bagels2• 2 years ago

I've been bitten by off leash dogs in California. They often give chase and try to attack your legs or bike wheels causing a crash.

alistairSH2• 2 years ago

Cycling in rural Virginia/West Virginia has this risk as well. 99% of pooches just want to run along and make noise, but 1/100 wants flesh.

The solution - never be the slowest in the group!

klyrs4• 2 years ago

When in Rome... open/constitutional carry, stand your ground?

sib• 2 years ago

Bikers gotta watch out for the cats as well!

https://www.kuow.org/stories/cougar-attack-washington-state-...

bagels2• 2 years ago

Deadly and non-deadly mountain lion attacks are rare, but dog attacks are not rare.

Jrjrir483• 2 years ago

I do hiking, the same.

Pepper spray, knife etc are illegal here. I carry air horn for quick deployment, and petards (very small explosives). Saved my ass twice! Once I was surrounded by pack of four large dogs!

baal80spam• 2 years ago

Wait, what? What country is a self-defense item like a pepper spray illegal in?

westmeal2• 2 years ago

No offense but why do you care what the law says when you're by yourself in the middle of the wilderness?

dmz73• 2 years ago

I can't say cyclists are my best friends either. Just had two buzz me with with few mm to spare while walking to work. Yes, I was on the footpath, cyclists are not allowed to ride on footpaths here, there was a bicycle path right next to the footpath. If I was a dog that would be even more disturbing - a huge fast monkey trying to kill you (and your owner) while you peacefully walk.

prmoustache4• 2 years ago

More than friendship, I think this is more a case of dependency. Sometimes it goes one way, sometimes both ways especially in the emotional part.

AndrewKemendo• 2 years ago

The current top contender for the first best friend is a puppy that lived, for a few months, more than 14,000 years ago in Central Europe.

Which tracks with the neolithic transition when we started "domesticating" animals for all purposes

feintruled2• 2 years ago

It's a bit of a fringe theory but there's a suggestion that the human 'alliance' with wolves gave us the edge over Neanderthals and other predators and ensured that it was us who ultimately survived as a species. It's a nice thought for a dog lover.

IncreasePosts• 2 years ago

Why wouldn't neanderthals form an alliance with wolves too? Especially considering Neanderthals had a multi-hundred-thousand year head start in wolf range compared to homo sapiens.

b5• 2 years ago

It’s an interesting question. I don’t know if there’s any evidence of wolf domestication by Neanderthals. If they didn’t domesticate them, it would be interesting to try to work out why – maybe there’s a subtle difference in psychology between H. Sapiens and H. Neanderthalensis that enabled us to bridge that gap but not them?

feintruled2• 2 years ago

Again we are in the realms of speculation upon speculation, but Neanderthals didn't have sclera (whites of the eyes) which according to the co-operative eye hypothesis as regards to domesticated hunting dogs allows them to follow our gaze. It does seem odd that Neanderthals didn't try to domesticate them too - surely the first reaction on seeing humans and dogs bring down a mammoth or corral large deer would be 'got to get us some of that', but as sibling comments say we don't know much about them really.

magicalhippo2• 2 years ago

Reminded me of the experiment to domesticate silver foxes[1]. Apparently they got quite tame foxes in just 30 generations.

Interestingly, while they were selected purely for lack of aggression towards humans they started to develop dog-like physical traits.

Hasn't been replicated yet, and doubtfully will, but interesting.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domesticated_silver_fox

sdwr• 2 years ago

Really fascinating, I love the implication that domestication is tied to juvenile characteristics (getting along in a group means acting more like a kid than an adult protecting your territory / breeding rights).

"Are we domesticated in the sense of dogs? No. But I am comfortable saying that the first thing that has to happen to get a human from an apelike ancestor is a substantial increase in tolerance toward one another."

Natsu• 2 years ago

It also seems to have something to do with adrenaline, making them less fearful. It's really interesting research.

Dalewyn• 2 years ago

I recall reading many years ago how humans are fundamentally juvenile even when we reach adulthood, given our propensity to socialize and more importantly play.

imzadi3• 2 years ago

It's interesting, though, because anyone who has ever owned a cat knows that they are only barely domesticated. It might be something in the canine brain that makes it easy to domesticate them.

Retric• 2 years ago

I don't think a lot of effort was put into actually intentionally breeding cats for domestication.

People seem to love them as semi wild animals and unlike dogs they aren't dangerous enough to be put down when they start biting people. On top of that a large percentage of the population are actually wild animals aka feral. Spend a lot of time with a kitten and it may become extremely affectionate, but we also habitually neuter them unlike the wild population. Go back 1,000 years and I suspect people acted similarly though without the neutering.

So the external evolutionary pressure for domestication doesn't seem nearly as strong as with those foxes, and might currently be going in the other direction.

satellite2• 2 years ago

It's because dogs are wolf with the Williams Syndrome. A DNA deletion syndrome which reduces aggression and increases empathy. In humans the syndrome produces individuals with characteristic facial features, a big smile and friendly traits.

Edit: visibly dog lovers are not too keen on learning that their best friends have a genetic abnormality. But that doesn't make it less true, it's pretty well documented. It doesn't mean that dogs are lesser somehow, they are still perfectly viable it the wild (well not the races resulting from the most extreme genetic selections, but most of them)

canjobear• 2 years ago

Cats aren't as deeply domesticated as dogs but there's clearly been some breeding effect which you see when you compare a housecat against a true wildcat (felis silvestris). The main thing is that housecats are comfortable around humans as long as they're exposed to humans within a critical age window, even if they were born in the wild to a feral cat. In contrast, wildcats never become comfortable around humans and are effectively always feral.

Housecats also have a number of behaviors that seem only distantly related to things that would be useful in the wild, such as meowing for attention. Another weird behavior is when cats line up dead mice outside their owner's bedroom door like a present. There's clearly some relationship that they understand between themselves and their owner.

droptablemain• 2 years ago

Whereas dogs were trained/bred/selected for specific purposes, I suspect cats were just kind of hanging out, following rodents which were were adjacent to human settlements.

It's easy to imagine humans simply tolerating them because they kept mice under control around grain and other food storage.

Intuitively that matches my perception of the cat-human relationship vs. the dog-human relationship.

cdchn2• 2 years ago

I remember reading once that cats pretend domesticated themselves. Rather then changing themselves to be more docile and acceptable to humans they adapted traits that just make them seem more appealing to humans.

fsckboy• 2 years ago

anyone who has ever owned a cat knows that they are only barely domesticated

just speculating, but wolves are "pack" animals, so they are already adapted to cooperating with each other and following a leader. perhaps that made them easier to train and domesticate. cats aren't like that except in the "lion pride" breeding sense which is perhaps a narrower skillset in terms of utility.

and of course, anybody who has owned a tiger will tell you that a cat is fairly domesticated :) I mention it because "domesticated" and "useful as a friend" might be two different things.

pvg2• 2 years ago

A few years ago someone was raising new questions about the validity of this study, it doesn't seem mentioned in the wikipedia page and I don't know how/if it was resolved or settled:

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/russian-foxes-tameness-d...

magicalhippo2• 2 years ago

It is mentioned in the intro section on the Wikipedia article. And as mentioned in your linked article, the dispute is disputed by others still...

Hence why I added the bit about not being replicated, it's far from settled science. Intriguing though, IMHO.

partiallypro• 2 years ago

Ancient Romans and Greeks would write things about their dogs and have custom grave stones made, one of my favorites reads:

"My eyes were wet with tears, our little dog, when I bore thee (to the grave)... So, Patricus, never again shall thou give me a thousand kisses. Never canst thou be contentedly in my lap. In sadness have I buried thee, and thou deservist. In a resting place of marble, I have put thee for all time by the side of my shade. In thy qualities, sagacious thou wert like a human being. Ah, me! What a loved companion have we lost!"

westmeal2• 2 years ago

Damn he must've been the goodest boy of all time, rest in peace Patricus.

willmadden• 2 years ago

Well before the cataclysm 12k years ago.

entropicgravity2• 2 years ago

Humans and dogs were two borderline species until dogs were domesticated. But together the two were so complementary, that they never looked back. The dogs had the speed, teeth, smell and baby sitting while humans had the weapons, rock throwing, intelligence and cooking. It was and is a killer combination that rose to the top of the animal world on earth so far.

sema4hacker• 2 years ago

By baby sitting you mean dog hearing?

entropicgravity2• 2 years ago

It's tricky for women to raise children in the wild. Especially once kids get to the ages between 2.5 and 8 when they'll want to explore their ever changing environment but mom still has to look for plants and berries and keep an eye any dangers and carnivores that are around. Dogs protect their own little ones in the wild and readily help to keep an eye on the human youngsters in the same way. Further more dogs will sound the alarm when needed. It's one more helping, important hand, that dogs bring to the bargain.

wingworks• 2 years ago

Dogs are the worst... at least some dog owners who leave their dogs outside barking all morning. Not nice for the neighbors and not nice to the dog.

proc03• 2 years ago

Dogs are little more than farm animals, in the sense that we're farming them for companionship. They might be our friends now that we have killed all the ones that would defy our commands.

Look at any wild animal, do they want to be owned, do they want to be put on a leash? Of course not. Animals want to be free like any other living being, but just like cows, dogs would not survive on their own because we have artificially selected them. Imagine aliens capturing humans, breeding them in captivity until they are docile little creatures that cannot survive on their own. It's easy to feel sorry for farm animals because we eat them, but in a way people who love pets are not any better than the farmer, despite the culture thinking otherwise.

fiedzia• 2 years ago

Look at any wild animal, do they want to be owned, do they want to be put on a leash?

Numerous wild animals can be held as pets, without going through domestication, so apparently they do. If you feed them, they may have no reason to mind the leash, life is hard in the wild.

proc03• 2 years ago

I think we would need to make a distinction between holding a wild animal in captivity temporarily and owning one as a pet or as an exhibition at the zoo. When people help wild animals that is of course good for them, and it helps preserve wild life. Having them as pets on the other hand is a different matter, and I would be very skeptical even if the animal seems happy because ultimately it would not know or have awareness of what is really going on. That said, it's a complicated issue, so it's not like I'm saying no one should own pets.

Intralexical2• 2 years ago

Animals want to be free like any other living being,

That's a nice thought, but in reality there are plenty of humans even that just get overwhelmed and scared at the thought of freedom, whether their own or other people's, and actively demand, seek, and create rigid and oppressive systems of rules and restrictions in order to trade freedom away for predictability. Otherwise… The entire human world would likely be shaped quite different from how it currently is.

Our morals don't map cleanly onto physical reality, and values like "freedom" are unfortunately still relatively inconsequential next to causalities like "death", "killing", "starvation", and "culling". Does a tapeworm "want to be free" from its host? How about a male anglerfish, which only has a nervous system complex enough to find a larger female anglerfish which it can latch onto while its entire body is subsumed away? Animals want whatever animals are neurologically wired to want, humans included, and only sometimes does that align with our higher ideals of life having intrinsic worth. The nature of things simply is, and in a lot of cases, I think the ways we try to assign moral judgements to it are projecting our own social instincts onto ecological and cognitive systems that do not share our values.

Certainly, the power dynamics, amount of control, and relative levels of awareness between humans and pets are… Would be rightfully horrifying, though, if the alternative were a relationship of equal peers.

proc03• 2 years ago

Ok, sure, maybe not all animals would feel that way, but I think probably all mammals or at least the smarter ones (relatively speaking). If dogs "want" to be pets, it's for the same reasons cows "want" to be farm animals, but it would be far-fetched to say a cow wants to be slaughtered and eaten. Sure a pet dog is not food, but compared to their wolf ancestors, they are far from their ideal natural state (if they have one at this point, which I guess is arguable, just like with cows).

I guess I'm mostly pointing to a double standard between pets and farm animals. I eat meat, so I'm not advocating for any solution on either case here, just making an observation that potentially we are farming animals for more than food, and there aren't any movements advocating for the release of pets or alternatives to animal companionship.

grumpy-de-sre• 2 years ago

Thank you for saying that, it's a bitter pill for a lot of people to swallow. I suspect most folks who struggle with squaring the facts just haven't spent much time around livestock.

parski• 2 years ago

Dogs are genetically defective slave wolves and it's weird that owning one is normal.

euroderf• 2 years ago

Dogs are working animals. A working dog is a happy dog.

When did dogs become our best friends?

Related Stories