Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Carnivora. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Dhole (Asiatic Wild Dog) v Staffordshire Bull Terrier
Topic Started: May 15 2012, 09:32 PM (9,051 Views)
Taipan
Member Avatar
Administrator

Dhole (Asiatic Wild Dog) - Cuon alpinus
The dhole (Cuon alpinus) is a species of canid native to South and Southeast Asia. It is the only extant member of the genus Cuon, which differs from Canis by the reduced number of molars and greater number of teats. The dholes are classed as endangered by the IUCN, due to ongoing habitat loss, depletion of its prey base, competition from other predators, persecution and possibly diseases from domestic and feral dogs. The dhole is a highly social animal, living in large clans which occasionally split up into small packs to hunt.[3] It primarily preys on medium-sized ungulates, which it hunts by tiring them out in long chases, and kills by disemboweling them. Unlike most social canids (but similar to African wild dogs), dholes let their pups eat first at a kill. Though fearful of humans, dhole packs are bold enough to attack large and dangerous animals such as wild boar, water buffalo, and even tigers. Prey animals in India include chital, sambar, muntjac, mouse deer, swamp deer, wild boar, gaur, water buffalo, banteng, cattle, nilgai, goats, Indian hares, Himalayan field rats and langurs. They are smaller than African wild dogs. Weight ranges from 10 to 25 kg (22 to 55 lb), with males averaging about 4.5 kg (9.9 lb) heavier. This dog is 88 to 113 cm (35 to 44 in) long from the snout to the base of the tail, with the tail averaging 45 cm (18 in) in length. Shoulder height is 42 to 55 cm (17 to 22 in).

Posted Image

Staffordshire Bull Terrier
The Staffordshire Bull Terrier (informally: Staffie, Stafford, Staffy or Staff) is a medium-sized, short-coated, old-time breed of dog. It is an English dog, where it is the 5th most popular breed, and related to the bull terrier. Having descended from dog-fighting ancestors, it is muscular and courageous. It is the subject of breed specific legislation in some jurisdictions. The Staffordshire Bull Terrier is a medium-sized, stocky, and very muscular dog with strong athletic ability, with a similar appearance to the American Staffordshire terrier and American pit bull terriers sharing the same ancestor. They have a broad head (male considerably more than female), defined occipital muscles, a relatively short foreface, dark round eyes and a wide mouth with a clean scissor-like bite (the top incisors slightly overlap the bottom incisors). The ears are small. The cheek muscles are very pronounced. Their lips show no looseness. From above, the head loosely resembles a triangle. The head tapers down to a strong well-muscled neck and shoulders placed on squarely spaced forelimbs. They are tucked up in their loins and the last 1-2 ribs of their ribcage are usually visible. Their tail resembles an old fashioned pump handle. Their hind quarters are well-muscled and are what give the Stafford drive when baiting. They are coloured brindle, black, red, fawn, blue, white, or any blending of these colors with white. White with any other colour broken up over the body is known as pied. Liver-colored, black and tan dogs can occur but are rare. The coat is smooth and clings tightly to the body giving the dog a streamlined appearance.The dogs stand 36 to 42 cm (14 to 17 in) at the withers and weigh 14 to 18 kg (31 to 40 lb) for males; bitches are 11 to 15.4 kg (24 to 34 lb).

Posted Image

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Bull and Terrier
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
After seeing a pack of dholes in Terra Natura Benidrom this summer, I must say that they must be the most beautful and most impressive wild canine their size. Some of the males looked very powerful for their size (neck, head). But after seeing them, I'm in no doubt a good sbt, ebt or apbt would beat them in a fight 1 vs 1.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sicilianu
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Someone brought in a stray staff bull terrier (I believe it was a not staffordshire terrier because of the smaller size). I did make a point to look at its teeth, and they did not seem large to me at all. Of course, this is without measure, so take it with a grain of salt if you like. I just thought I would comment since it just happened.

I still lean towards the dhole. The bull terrier I met, although strong without a doubt, is too slow.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vivyx
Member Avatar
Felines, sharks, birds, arthropods
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
SBT would win this comfortably at similar weights.
Edited by Vivyx, Dec 10 2016, 03:49 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lycaon
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The staffy would probably win if we all viewed this fight in the old archaic fighting style where the wild canid doesn't utilize its advantages and charges into the dog like in a fantasy movie, but this isn't the case. The dhole has the agility, weaponry and height advantage and will quite easily run around the staffy while being able to bite and dodge repeatedly. These canids excel at the long game and the dhole's agility outshines even that of the wild wolves. This is where all of the little quirks begin to manifest themselves. The dhole's effortless bounding and acceleration, robust skull, more damaging teeth all play their part in wearing out and crippling the dog. The dog probably wouldn't care mentally, it would insist on closing the gap while its body takes the beating and wears out. And if the dog does somehow manages to grab the dhole, the dhole's butchering teeth be used in effect as it frantically bites and slices away to regain freedom. Then it comes down to the dog being able to dispatch the dhole before it find itself shredded. Of course that is easier said than done on the staffy's end because this isn't like fighting a domestic dog, whose bite and teeth could be more absorbed for a lengthy time as it delivers its own beating.
Posted Image
Edited by Lycaon, Mar 19 2018, 04:51 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grazier
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Pretty much agree, but IF the dhole got caught in a hold its going to be completely manhandled and most likely destroyed. Once the SBT got it I'm not worried about the dholes frantic bites, it will be tossed around and controlled with no real chance to retaliate at all. I would however be worried (if I owned the SBT) about the dholes keeping a distance and using hit and run tactics while the SBT runs around fruitlessly like a fool. One thing that has changed about me over the years is my appreciation for speed and agility. Owning a straight bull terrier or bull mastiff, even a very fit working specimen, doesn't appeal to me much anymore even acknowledging they are better in the actual close quarter engagement I'm much more attracted to the functional abilities of a bull/sighthound. I say this having owned many bull terriers and bull mastiffs and one bull sighthound. I just know which I'd feel safe taking into wolf or leopard or whatever country.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lycaon
Member Avatar
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
If it were another fighting dog frantically biting back I would not be worried for the sbt myself. But a dhole is on another caliber from dogs when it comes to the damage their teeth can do. These animals butchers, with slicing teeth that readily strip away at the skin. And considering the dhole hit and run tactic as opposed to a typical gladiator collision, a grip by the sbt isn't likely going to be anywhere near the neck. Which gives the dhole plenty of areas to try to bite the dog off and and opportunities to break away when the dog inevitably readjusts its hold. I could imagine the dog inching slowly to the inevitable deadly clamp on the neck, but such a tactic requires one dog to make a pause, which often happens when one is trying to catch its breath. I doubt we will ever get to that point with the dhole and the sbt where the dogs superior stamina for combat will manifest itself into a secured victory. That struggling and frantic opponent is how coyotes are able to escape from catch dogs (only works if one dog is involved). Pushing away from the dog, madly biting at or into its face and shooting off when the dog tries to adjust its bite. Or we could have a dog that refuses to release its grip and rags the coyote to death in one gruesome and drawn out process but ends up torn up in the process. If the sharper teeth of coyotes can make big impact on larger dogs, the larger dhole is going to have a greater effect with its superior weaponry. Dhole have rather wide jaws, "reddhole/reddog" noted that a dhole skull he had measurements of had a wider head than his larger apbt.
Grazier
Mar 19 2018, 09:35 PM
One thing that has changed about me over the years is my appreciation for speed and agility. Owning a straight bull terrier or bull mastiff, even a very fit working specimen, doesn't appeal to me much anymore even acknowledging they are better in the actual close quarter engagement I'm much more attracted to the functional abilities of a bull/sighthound. I say this having owned many bull terriers and bull mastiffs and one bull sighthound. I just know which I'd feel safe taking into wolf or leopard or whatever country.
I feel like speed and agility has been underappreciated as a whole. I remember always being mostly impressive by the western mastiff type dogs, the non overdone ones of course. Which gave me the impression that dogs lost their functional capabilities past the 110-120 pound mark. But boy was I wrong when I saw random wolfhound and other large mixes being able to run down foxes and other nimble prey. Had a friend who had an irish wolfhound x bloodhound that could run down red fox in the states with relative ease; of course this wasn't an intentional breeding, but it showed him that if a wolfhound can still produce a good dog even if bred to a crappy bloodhound, then that breed is going to create quality animals with actually great dogs involved. And today he has athletic and impressive wolfhound mixes that are 140-150 pounds, that outrun lighter pure wolfhounds. Pretty much recreating a functional Irish wolfhound using various breeds while honing on in the IW morphology without the detrimental inbreeding of purebred dogs, which pretty much was how it was back in the day.
Edited by Lycaon, Mar 20 2018, 04:25 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Thergi
Member Avatar
Autotrophic Organism
[ *  * ]
I agree with Lycaon.
I believe the different animals' fighting styles as well as the aforementioned maneuverability has been heavily overlooked in these inter-canid matches.
I remember reading somewhere that Dholes had the strongest bite of any extant canid lb for lb, is this correct?
Or am I thinking of a different species?
Also, do you pronounce it, "Dee Hole" or "Deeole"?
Edited by Thergi, Mar 21 2018, 10:29 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grazier
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Or we could have a dog that refuses to release its grip and rags the coyote to death in one gruesome and drawn out process but ends up torn up in the process.

I automatically expect an sbt to behave this way, I'm not sure it gets torn up. I believe the dhole will be shaken off kilter for the entirety of the engagement while the sbt holds it's grip and rag dolls the dhole. Depending on where it is gripped it might not be able to retaliate at all, if like you say the sbt is unable to get a hold sufficiently close to the head then sure the dhole might get it's licks in while it is ragdolled around, but still it will be in a lot more trouble being actually clamped in the dogs jaws and thrashed around, than the sbt who might be caught with glancing slashes from it's thrashing foe. I don't find it likely the latter will cause it much trouble, let alone enough to sway the outcome.

All this is based on assuming the sbt achieves a hold, which a dhole could concievably avoid and pick an sbt apart. All I'm saying is if things deteriorate into a locked together scuffle, the sbt has every advantage. With room and distance the dhole has every advantage.

Wolfhound crosses can be extremely impressive. And yeah it almost doesn't matter what they're crossed with, you will get a better dog than both parents. The only dogs over 45-50 kgs I have any time for would be wolfhound crosses. 45 kgs wolfhound crosses can be great too though, but as I have mentioned I have known an extremely capable 75 kgs fit lean wolfhound cross boar dog (which I witnessed run down a fox in an open course, and also I know actually killed 80+ kgs boars single handed). There was also the feral wolfhound cross boardog that was shot which weighed 75 kgs, I'm sure it was an extremely fit and fast agile dog.
Quote:
 
Also, do you pronounce it, "Dee Hole" or "Deeole"?

Wouldn't it be like hole but a d sound on the front?
Edited by Grazier, Mar 21 2018, 08:16 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sam1
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Slightly off topic..but Grazier, I'm just interested what do you have to say about a wolf single handedly taking down a 600lb bison?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grazier
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Sam1
Mar 22 2018, 01:05 AM
Slightly off topic..but Grazier, I'm just interested what do you have to say about a wolf single handedly taking down a 600lb bison?
"Nice".

But 600 lbs? Do you perhaps mean musk ox? That's very small for a bison, like a juvenile. Even a yearling should weigh more than that.

I thought there was a case of a wolf killing an adult bison which would be more like 1500 lbs.

Edit - does this have something to do with me mentioning the wolfhound cross killing 80+ kg boar? And you're saying "that's nothing, how about this?".

Yeah nah. At face value its a good point, upon deeper investigation it isn't. The dog would attack healthy prime young male boars with full gas tanks head on and kill them. Wolves never ever do that with any prey animal. They "harvest" beasts they have been following and working on for months, only when the time is right. Its impressive what that wolf did and impressive what lots of other single wolves have done too. Especially considering their gracile frames, but make no mistake these wolves wouldn't even start on nipping a fit young angry boar like the ones this dog would kill immediately upon first introduction. They'd just be like "c ya" and maybe down the line after the boar got old and slow and tired with a limp they'd decide its time to start harassing it for a few months. That OR they would have picked on it earlier when it was a little sucker.

Wolves strictly prey on weakness and vulnerability, and work towards increasing it when they find it before they even think about killing anything.
Edited by Grazier, Mar 22 2018, 03:05 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sam1
Herbivore
[ *  *  *  * ]
Well maybe you should see this then.
Btw I know about the account against a full grown bison too, but it was completely different..wolf just kept nipping at the sick animal for like two days until it collapsed.

https://youtu.be/ruEBfgAOVNo
Edited by Sam1, Mar 22 2018, 03:35 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Vivyx
Member Avatar
Felines, sharks, birds, arthropods
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Thergi
Mar 21 2018, 10:28 AM
Also, do you pronounce it, "Dee Hole" or "Deeole"?
Always thought it was pronounced like "doll".
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The All-seeing Night
Member Avatar
You are without honor
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I’ve always just pronounced it as if the h was silent.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Black Ice
Member Avatar
Drom King
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Grazier
Mar 22 2018, 02:49 AM
Sam1
Mar 22 2018, 01:05 AM
Slightly off topic..but Grazier, I'm just interested what do you have to say about a wolf single handedly taking down a 600lb bison?
"Nice".

But 600 lbs? Do you perhaps mean musk ox? That's very small for a bison, like a juvenile. Even a yearling should weigh more than that.

I thought there was a case of a wolf killing an adult bison which would be more like 1500 lbs.

Edit - does this have something to do with me mentioning the wolfhound cross killing 80+ kg boar? And you're saying "that's nothing, how about this?".

Yeah nah. At face value its a good point, upon deeper investigation it isn't. The dog would attack healthy prime young male boars with full gas tanks head on and kill them. Wolves never ever do that with any prey animal. They "harvest" beasts they have been following and working on for months, only when the time is right. Its impressive what that wolf did and impressive what lots of other single wolves have done too. Especially considering their gracile frames, but make no mistake these wolves wouldn't even start on nipping a fit young angry boar like the ones this dog would kill immediately upon first introduction. They'd just be like "c ya" and maybe down the line after the boar got old and slow and tired with a limp they'd decide its time to start harassing it for a few months. That OR they would have picked on it earlier when it was a little sucker.

Wolves strictly prey on weakness and vulnerability, and work towards increasing it when they find it before they even think about killing anything.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=33s&v=Sa1ls7le_xo

Quote:
 
People who study animal behavior think they may have found out why wolves hunt in packs-because ravens are such good scavengers.

Scientists who have watched wolves on Isle Royale in Lake Superior came up with the raven-wolf pack theory after puzzling over a question-why do wolves hunt in large groups when a single wolf is able take down a moose on its own?

To find a possible answer, John Vucetich and Rolf Peterson of Michigan Tech and Thomas Waite of Ohio State University examined 27 years of wolf observations on Isle Royale in northern Michigan. Isle Royale, 45 miles long and up to nine miles wide, sits in the northwest lobe of Lake Superior. Designated a national park, the island supports a population of a few dozen wolves and hundreds of moose. Peterson has studied the wolves for more than 30 years, and the group of researchers used his observations and those of his coworkers in the present study.

Peterson's team has seen a single wolf kill a moose 11 times, which weakens the notion that wolves hunt in packs because of the difficulty of killing a moose without help. Vucetich, Peterson and Waite used the years of data from the Isle Royale wolf study to calculate that-in terms of energy burned and meat gained-wolves would do best hunting in pairs.

A 1,000-pound moose is much more than two wolves can eat right away, and that's where the ravens come in. In a study published in Animal Behaviour, the scientists detailed these facts about ravens found by others: individual ravens can eat and carry away up to 4 pounds of food per day from a large carcass and ravens removed half of a 660-pound moose carcass from a kill site in the Yukon Territory.

During the 27 years of Peterson's wolf observations used in the recent study, ravens were present at every wolf kill, often within 60 seconds of a moose's death. Noted raven researcher Bernd Heinrich of the University of Vermont has suggested that ravens evolved with wolves, with ravens possibly leading wolves to moose or caribou, and then later feeding upon the carcasses torn open by wolves.

That the wolf pack exists because of ravens is a new idea, supported by the group's "conservative assumption" that wolves can lose up to 44 pounds of food per day to ravens while feeding upon a carcass. They estimate that a pair of wolves loses about 37 percent of a moose carcass to ravens while a pack of six wolves loses just 17 percent. Ravens sneak in to eat or carry away scraps of moose flesh and organs while wolves are feeding or resting away from the carcass, and the more ravens there are (researchers have counted up to 100 near kill sites), the harder it is for wolves to chase them off.

The urge to avoid starvation may drive wolves to kill "approximately twice as many large prey as would be needed in the absence of ravens," the scientists wrote. They also wrote that 85 to 90 percent of carnivore species hunt alone, and the wolf pack might not exist if not for the pesky, bold raven.

http://www.sitnews.us/0604news/061206/061204_ak_science.html


Quote:
 
Wolf winter predation on moose and roe deer in relation to pack size
Camilla Wikenros 2001


Abstract: Wolf (Canis lupus) winter predation on moose (Alces alces) and roe deer(Capreolus capreolus) were studied in the small, but fast growing wolf population on the Scandinavian Peninsula. Wolves in one territory were radio- and snow-tracked during two successive winters. The wolf pack consisted of an adult pair during the first winter (1999–2000), and of an adult male and three pups the following winter. Kill rate on moose was 7.4–9.2 days/kill for the adult pair and 4.0–4.8 days/kill for the pack of four wolves. The consumed proportion of wolf-killed moose at first feeding occasion was relatively low during both winters (44% and 51%) but wolves utilized carcasses by revisits at previous kill sites. Wolves did not select to kill malnourished moose as nutritional condition of wolf-killed moose was comparable to moose harvested by hunters. Handling time at first feeding occasion did not differ with increased pack size, but were longer for the pups as compared to the adult male. The adult male and pups were solitary in 61–68% of all locations during the second year of study while the adult pair was solitary in 13% during the first year of study. Hunting success of the adult male on moose (60%) and roe deer (100%) during the second year of study was higher as compared to the first year (21% and 55%). Chasing distances during successful attacks by wolves on roe deer were longer thanon moose."

Other interesting findings -

"Of the 21 wolf-killed moose, 4 were killed by the adult male alone, and 14 by the adult male in company with one or two pups. For the remaining three moose, the numbers of wolves involved in the killings were unknown."

"Hunting success in the Grangärde territory in winter of 2000–2001 was 60% on moose and 100% on roe deer. This was higher than reported from Alaska (26% on moose, Mech et al. 1998) and Canada (46% on white-tailed deer, Kolenosky 1972). The higher hunting success rate in the Grangärde territory could result from prey being more inexperienced to predators (Berger et al. 2001) but more data need to be gathered from other wolf packs."

"During both winters, wolves killed more calves than adults, and all adults were ! 7 years old. That wolves prey primarily on young-of-the-year and animals in older age-classes, are in accordance with other studies where moose are the primary prey (Pimlott 1967, Hayes et al. 1991, Mech et al. 1995, Olsson et al. 1997, Mech et al. 1998, Hayes et al. 2000). Fuller and Keith (1980) explained this by the fact that young and old moose most likely are easier to kill than animals in their prime age. Moreover, all wolf-killed adult moose during the study were females. A female biased predation on adult moose is in accordance with Olsson et al. (1997) who reported that wolves killed no males older than two years old, during a study in south-central Sweden. Adult female moose is probably easier to kill for wolves than adult male moose due to their smaller size."

http://www.de5stora.com/illustrationer/fil_20041123132025.pdf


Quote:
 
Wolves did not select to kill malnourished moose as nutritional condition of wolf-killed moose was comparable to moose harvested by hunters.


Grazier
 
Wolves never ever do that with any prey animalThey "harvest" beasts they have been following and working on for months, only when the time is right.


This is literally like the fifth time you've outright shown you literally have no idea what you're even rambling on about.

Please stop. It's cringeworthy.
Edited by Black Ice, Mar 22 2018, 08:38 AM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Grazier
Omnivore
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
"Malnourished" is only one possible weakness of thousands that a moose might have which would deem it ready for harvest.

I have no problem with the kills eventually being performed by a lone wolf. I have actually always maintained single wolves can kill what wolf packs can kill, and I've argued wolves kill larger prey 1 on 1 than similar sized felines.

And without ambush. However, they are masters at choosing what to kill and when. To deny this is to actually insult the complex master of their domain that they are. They're prey analysts, not just simpleton hunters that chase things which run. They can see (and smell) things wrong with animals that we can't. And they will know the actual medical history of every single animal that calls their territory home and know all its habits. This is the most interesting thing about wolves and the best reason to admire them. Killing moose one on one is cool or whatever, but you're disrespecting wolves if you don't go to the trouble to actually understand how they truly operate.
Edited by Grazier, Mar 22 2018, 08:52 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Interspecific Conflict · Next Topic »
Add Reply