The Domestication of Foxes

So today on Scientific American, one of my favorite authors wrote about one of my favorite subjects: the Russian experiment in domesticating silver foxes. Besides being extremely interesting from a scientific and ethical point of view, the foxes are just. so. CUTE!




Basically, Dmitri K. Belyaev theorized that the wide variation in anatomical and physiological traits of domesticated animals of any species was due to behavioral selection for tameness and against aggression. To test this, the scientists took some wild silver foxes and selectively bred only those who showed willingness to approach and interact with humans. After several generations, the domesticated foxes did take on more dog-like physiological traits, like floppy ears, short or curly tails, and different colored coats. And this was selecting for behavior only, not physical traits!

Anyway, after 50 or so years of this project going on, they have a bunch of domesticated foxes that act like dogs. They are still continuing to observe the changes in behavior, anatomy, physiology, etc. However, since money is tight in Russia, some of the foxes are being sold for fur, or as pets.

Now, why did I post this in SD? What is so serious about the foxes being oh so freaking adorable? Well, I wanted to discuss the science and ethics of this experiment, and of what they are doing to the animals. Some points to consider:

*Was the experiment ethical in the first place?
*How ethical is it to sell these foxes as pets or for fur?
*If it is ok to do this to foxes, is it ok to do it for other species? What does this mean for the exotic pet trade?
*If the foxes are raised in human households instead of the way they did in the experiment where they don't really interact with the foxes (aside from testing for tameness), how do you think they will act?
*Why do you think selecting for behavior also opens up a wide variety of physiological changes? How do you think these mechanisms work?

How long do these animals live?

Their website doesn't really say, but I'd assume around the same as wild foxes?

Which is?

Erm, about 3yrs in the wild, or 10-13 in captivity? It's similar to how long dogs live, I guess.XD

About the ethics, I think it's much better that they're sold as pets rather than for fur. They come neutered/spayed and have all their shots and stuff. However, on the flip side, foxes can be devastating to the wildlife of places where they aren't endemic, so if an owner isn't watchful about the pet foxes, the local wildlife could suffer.

Meh, no more than a typical dog would have been since they are pretty similar.

Though it sounds like their lifespan would be shorter than the average dog in that case.

Which makes their price seem like not a very good investment.

Ethically, it's pretty much the same thing as dogs and cats. Is it wrong for us to have them as pets?

At least with these foxes they are a predator so it is easier for them to adapt to us. Things like rabbits and hamsters are prey and have a much harder and more stressful life trying to deal with us.

If I had a spare 6K to burn, I would so buy a fox kit (yes that is the name for a baby fox) as a pet.

I guess the more pressing ethical question would be "is it ok to domesticate more species of animals?" Cats, dogs, pigs, etc. have already been domesticated, like, forever, but is it right to domesticate new species? What about lions? Ocelots? Other exotic species?

To me a fox seems like a kinda cross between a dog and a cat- which i find really cute :) I would love to own a fox like that old lady in fox and the hound ^^

Dogs, cats, horses, oxens, etc. were all domesticated hundreds of years ago for a specific work purpose. Whether it was to help with the harvesting, hunting, or to control a pest issue, I believe most were domesticated for practical reasons. In that sense, it was understandable as to why people chose to domesticate such animals at that time. In today's technologically advanced world however, is there any real need for the domestication of additional species?

I'm not sure if I would use such a strong word as "unethical" to describe this practice, but I am against the business of domesticating and selling exotic species -- especially when it is done for the purpose of creating luxury items (e.g., fur).

Yep, that bolded part is the big question. On one hand, I suppose domestication can help species survive, as most of the very successful mammalian species nowadays are tied in to humans in some way--dogs, cats, rats, horses, etc. If we approach domestication from a conservationist view--that is, try to breed and domesticate animals that are endangered in some way, does this make it more or less ethical?

I really have no issue with the fur, pet, or meat trades as long as they are done humanely. No cruel killing practices, maintain standard of living while the animals are alive, etc. Sure that produces more expensive fur, pets, or meat, but yeah.

First off, let me say that I'd get a fox in no time flat if I could.


Nextly, what's the problem? Dogs started out the same way, way back when.

Who's to say foxes can't turn into good companions too?

Ah, I just read about the same experiment in Dawkins' new book. Not sure if it's the exact same experiment, but hey, everything is just so similar let's just assume both books refer to the same experiment.

Anyway, answers.



I don't really judge any experiment as "ethical" or not, but seeing that people are okay with selective breeding of plants since who knows when and this is basically the same exact thing, I don't see how this can be said as not ethical.




Hmm... another ethics question. Using the same reasoning above, since pet shops exist and some animals really are hunted for their meat etc, I don't see any prob with calling this "ethical" as well.




Same as the 1st question. We do it on plants all the time. I don't see any prob with it. I mean, it's not like the animals go through anything torturous in the breeding.




Hmm... interesting. I'm not exactly sure, but I'm gonna assume they would behave as pet dogs do. Pet dogs are originally selectively bred from the wild ones as well.




Breeding for specific traits means allowing only specific genes to be passed on to the next gen. And I think it's fair to assume that the specific genes don't encode only that one specific trait in it. As the concentration of that particular allele increases in newer generations, the other traits that is carried by them also become more and more apparent. And that is what we observe as changes in physical characteristics even though we are breeding for something that seems unrelated to those changes.

It would be interesting to have one, but if they just started doing it, its going to take many generations to get them domesticated, we havent even fully domesticated cats yet

It's actually been going on 50yrs now, and the experiment showed that domestication takes much much shorter than originally imagined! So the foxes they're selling are pretty much tame and show dog-like behaviors like sniffing humans hands and wanting to hang around them.

Wolves, coyotes and foxes are the base to the whole domestication of dogs. At least it was taught to me in high school and the animal channel.

You bring up an interesting point. As stated in your first post, however, domestication can have a profound impact upon an animal's behavioral, and in some instances, physical attributes (e.g., drooping ears on canines). To breed an endangered species in the name of preservation is one thing, but to breed and domesticate them is an entirely different idea -- their genetics will be altered throughout the process, producing a species quite different from its ancestor. I almost want to say that the domestication of an endangered species defeats the very purpose of its preservation in the first place.



I agree with you on your opinion of pets and animal meat, but we have fundamentally different opinions on fur. I'm against the killings of animals for the sake of luxury items, as I find the act of killing itself to be cruel. Unlike meat, fur doesn't serve a practical purpose for most people anymore. At one point in time, it was used by humans as shelter against the cold, but ever since the advent of synthetic coats, we don't really need fur/skin coats anymore.

Domesticated foxes would be cool but killing them for fur is quite a big waste these days. And I don't mind if there is domesticated wolves/coyotes too, but when you get into the area of tigers and lions etc, I'd raise a eyebrow.

Reasons being: You cannot communicate to them and tell them what's ok and wrong via our language.

They're fucking big.

They're carnivorous.

I will not approach a tiger unless it's in a zoo cage or domesticated tiger unless I was in full plate mail and sitting in a battle tank. Sorry but, I can't help it. I feel like my safety is threaten too much. If I know there's a tiger running around I will feel a big urge to kill it so I can sleep in peace again. Hell my house, a tiger can rip through, I don't live in a castle.

Pretty expensive, and I'm not really a "fox person". Although I'm really interested to know on how exactly the domesticated these foxes.

*Was the experiment ethical in the first place?

Selective breeding has been going on for quite some time now. The German Shepherd breed was developed when people wanted a type of dog that was intelligent, fast, protective, and capable of herding sheep. As a result, shepherds bred dogs that they believed had the characteristics they wanted. This experiment doesn't seem to be a whole lot different besides the fact that behavioral patterns were the focus here. Personally, I really don't see anything unethical about this experiment. The scientists/experimenters are still only breeding foxes with foxes. Now, if they were creating some fox-frog mix, thats an entirely different story.

*How ethical is it to sell these foxes as pets or for fur?

I actually think selling these animals as pets is not only ok, but pretty awesome as well. I would love to have a friendly, beautiful silver fox as my buddy. However, I despise the idea that these animals would be sold off to be killed just for their pelts. However, is it unethical? Well...not by society's standards I don't think it would be seen as a BIG no no. Definitely would be seen as unethical by a portion of the population and ok with others. Even though I hate it, I don't see it as extremely unethical. I hope that makes sense, lol.



I don't care how domesticated an animal is claimed to be, if it's carnivorous and is bigger than a great dane, I don't want it anywhere near me in open space.

Great. Just 4k to go.