Pet Ownership by Country

Angela

Elite member
Messages
21,823
Reaction score
12,325
Points
113
Ethnic group
Italian
I'm surprised by the relative percentages of some countries. For example, I thought the Brits were such dog lovers. Also, what's up with the Swedes and Dutch? Why so few pets of any kind?

OFaVa9D.png


Who knew Russians loved cats so much.
L84X8zW.png
 
Just came back from vacation in Greece, so I'm surprised that Greece is so low in cats ownership. Cats are everywhere there on streets and roofs, but I guess they must be stray cats.
 
o67IuyU-e1509433336254.png

(map made by statista.com)

In Lithuania, there are more dogs compared to overall population than elsewhere in Europe. In reality dogs are even more numerous, because some dogs are not registered and were not included into statistics (it is not mandatory to register your pet in Lithuania.

Overall, it may seem that the richer the country (Sweden, Germany, Austria), the fewer the dogs, apart from Greece where cats are traditionally more popular.
Alternatively, the countries with more space can afford to have more dogs (which is quite reasonable as people living in big cities have more challenges when finding good place to walk their dog, etc) Though this correlation may not be true, too.
 
The data on pet ownership differs if numbers are on pets per person or pets per household, because households are so different.
77342c93-05fb-4b97-8a49-cdc5f127e50c
 
[h=1]"Owning a dog is influenced by our genetic make-up"[/h]https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190517081636.htm

The article does not say much else - regarding which genetic variants influence the choice of owing a dog, and if these variants can be related to farmer, steppe or forager ancestry. I suppose, following the previous map Humans per dog, people with more HG ancestry should be more attached to dogs.
 
"Owning a dog is influenced by our genetic make-up"

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190517081636.htm

The article does not say much else - regarding which genetic variants influence the choice of owing a dog, and if these variants can be related to farmer, steppe or forager ancestry. I suppose, following the previous map Humans per dog, people with more HG ancestry should be more attached to dogs.


They used identical twins to come to the conclusion, which makes sense, but didn't investigate which genes were more involved.

They did say this:

[FONT=&quot]"Perhaps some people have a higher innate propensity to care for a pet than others." says Tove Fall, lead author of the study, and Professor in Molecular Epidemiology at the Department of Medical Sciences and the Science for Life Laboratory, Uppsala University."

Having a dog, even more than a cat, is a lot of work, so it has to "give" you a lot in return or you wouldn't do it. I'd say companionship and affection is what you get when it's a pet and not a "work" dog, yes? There's an English saying: "If you want a best friend, get a dog". There are some who prefer them to people. The older I get the more I understand that.

In fact, it can be as much work as caring for a small child, and yet it isn't as ego-centric, because it's not "you" in the sense that your children are...

I don't know about the connection to hunter-gatherers. They're certainly of no use in farming. "Work" dogs today are often used either in hunting or in the herding of animals. The only use of a dog I've seen in actual "crop" farming is scaring away crows and other birds eating the crops.

However, I've had a dog (and cats) my whole life, and love my current dog so much it's scary, and I have very little WHG. :)
[/FONT]
 
"Everyone has a right to love a dog and take care of them until one of them dies.
Every dog has a right to be a dog."

There is a place in Vilnius inhabited by artists and poets which has its own human rights and constitution. I rather like those. Those are the rights about dogs ...
 

This thread has been viewed 6993 times.

Back
Top