OK, here me out, the STORY is about cops raiding a pot farm in BC, but it made me think of Raymond Coppinger’s idea that wolves self-domesticated themselves as mediated by natural selection (from Dawkins’ The Greatest Show on Earth, p. 71-3).  According to the argument, wolves that had a lower “flight distance” when it came to eating in human dumps, after many generations, eventually became domesticated and as such became dogs. 

In Canada, feeding bears is illegal as it leads to bears associating food with humans and increases the likelihood of bears coming into towns and cities to look for food.

As a parallel, I see these bears undergoing the same process as the wolves that later became known to us as our best friend (though cats are far superior).  I’m reminded of footage from California of bears being chased off from uppity gated communities.  Honestly, wouldn’t a domesticated bear descendant be an awesome pet, in say a few hundred (thousand?) years? 

Conservation officers are deciding the fate of the bears.

I’m sure scientists in prehistoric times deliberated on the problem of gentle wolves in their dwellings.

While I get along quite well with dogs and cats, I’ve had a few of them become annoyed with me.  I don’t think I’d care for a pet that might get annoyed and eat me.

Occam

Chudwick, Ta tanka means buffalo.  Technically Tanka means big and Ta refers to the animal.  Ta Tanka has nothing to do with wolves or bears.  So I’m not sure what you are referring to with such a reference.  You’re not American Indian are you?  Nor been around any American Indians, have you?

Pot farm? Guard bears? I think I can guess why the bears were so laid back: brownies! But I’m with Occam. I can handle dogs and don’t care one way or t’other about cats, but I’d rather not domesticate an animal that requires a backhoe to scoop the poop out of my back yard.

Yes, but what does that have to do with Ta Tanka?  We aren’t talking about buffaloes.

Mriana - 19 August 2010 08:56 PM

Yes, but what does that have to do with Ta Tanka?  We aren’t talking about buffaloes.

It’s a reference to the movie Dances with Wolves.  In the movie, if you remember, Costner’s character witnesses the self-domestication of a wolf, much as in Coppinger’s view.  In the movie he (Costner) finally communicates with the local Indian population by establishing that using the word tatanka. In trying to keep the movie reference going, I thought that the bears in BC would be the new tatanka, but “not really” (see title of post) since, as you clearly pointed out, bears and buffalo are not identical.  I simply liked the imagery.

Chudwick - 20 August 2010 02:52 AM

Mriana - 19 August 2010 08:56 PM

Yes, but what does that have to do with Ta Tanka?  We aren’t talking about buffaloes.

It’s a reference to the movie Dances with Wolves.  In the movie, if you remember, Costner’s character witnesses the self-domestication of a wolf, much as in Coppinger’s view.  In the movie he (Costner) finally communicates with the local Indian population by establishing that using the word tatanka. In trying to keep the movie reference going, I thought that the bears in BC would be the new tatanka, but “not really” (see title of post) since, as you clearly pointed out, bears and buffalo are not identical.  I simply liked the imagery.

I see.  Interesting thought in relationship to the movie.  And yes, I’ve seen the movie many times.  I own both the director’s cut and the regular movie version.