Hi, everyone. My name is Ujwal. This is my-- my-- my daughter Dodo. She is a four-year-old Pomsky. She is a pivotal part of our life. My name is Lisette. I have a three-year-old chocolate Labrador retriever called Sigi. He just became my bestie, and we go everywhere and explore here in Canada places. This is Luna. I love this girl so much because I mean, like, look at her. She's so cute. And she's just amazing, unconditional love. If she doesn't love me back, I will still love her. JEYAN: Jay, thank you so much for joining us. Thanks, Jeyan. Inside beautiful Grange Park. Now, since I've been here, I've seen lots of dogs being walked, and it's kind of crazy to think that, at one point, humans didn't have pets. And I'm hoping you can tell us how far this relationship goes back. Well, the true answer is a long time, but we're not sure exactly how long. But I can give you what are at least the minimum time. So, dogs were first. Cat owners, don't despair; they were a long time ago, too. And the oldest fossilized animal that is unambiguously a dog is just over 14,000 years old, and it was buried with a human. So, that's really much of the evidence that it was a pet. And it's distinguishable from a wolf, but wolves were the ancestors. They became dogs. You ask me, when did this first happen? It's really tricky because, inevitably, if you have wolves transitioning to dogs, there are going to be a lot of ambiguous ones in the middle that have some dog features and some wolf features. And in fact, if you're looking at skulls, it's very hard. Wolves' teeth are a little bit further apart, their muzzle is a little bit longer, but you know, if I had a skull of a wolf and a skull of a dog here and showed them to you, you'd really have to look close. So, 14,000 years old for dogs. On the dogs and wolves, the dogs that we know today, are they related to the modern wolf that we know today? No. The wolf that gave rise to dogs is extinct. So, when people talk about wolf dogs, they're not-- they're talking about a modern creation. Okay. And it's actually quite unfortunate that that wolf is extinct, and I'm not sure anybody knows how long ago it died out. But the really interesting and still unresolved question is, okay, there were wolves, there were humans, they weren't farming yet, right, because 14,000 years earlier than farming, like, how did they get together? What was that relationship like? Yeah. Because you wouldn't expect that humans would approach wolves; that would be kind of dumb. And would wolves approach humans? That would be also kind of dumb. So, there's two conflic-- somewhat conflicting theories. One is the humans were the instigators, that they would maybe go out, grab a new group of puppies, wolf puppies, bring them in to the human group, and keep them, and train them to be, you know, not exactly tame, but at least tolerable-- tolerant of humans, and the humans could tolerate them, too. Then, if you kept those wolves and they bred, eventually, you'd start to select genes for tameness, if you want to call it that. That's one version. The other is that the wolves were the instigators, and when you have a group of humans of no particular size moving through the landscape, they're leaving all kinds of trash because we've always been good at that. Right. And there's probably food that can be eaten. And so, the wolves learn that this is a source. And then, the bolder of the wolves will approach closer. And then, eventually, you can get some sort of meeting. It's extremely difficult, considering this was before 14,000 years, right, because you already have a dog then, really difficult to choose between the two. But those are the two going theories. I just want to be clear, you're not suggesting that people go into a den and take some pups these days. Well, it's up to you, really. (Chuckling) It's true that you shouldn't go into a wolf den, but if you go to places like Ellesmere Island, where-- in the Arctic, where wolves have not really seen very many people, they're incredibly tolerant of people. And you-- people have act-- modern people have actually gone in, taken some pups out of a den, played with them, put them back, with no consequence. So, um-- but yes, don't do it today. I want to stay in the past. Talk to me about ancient Egypt, because there is a site, a zoo, that was discovered that kind of shed some light in terms of our relationship and our fascination with animals and pets. So, let's switch to cats... Okay. Let's go. ...because we've spent a lot of time on dogs. I'm a dog person. Well, but I also had cats. Anyway... So, ancient Egypt was a very interesting kind of cognitive dissonant culture when it came to cats. So, cats were definitely pampered. There are wonderful paintings of a cat underneath the dining room table, eating a whole fish, when you can see the feet of his or her mistress, you know, sitting there. So, there was that. The problem was they became so popular that there were at least two Egyptian gods with cat's heads. They were sort of cats personified. Now, when you have gods, you want to give offerings to them, and the perfect offering turned out to be mummified cats. And so, it wasn't, apparently, just a case of, "Oh, the cat died, let's mummify it and give it to the god." Cats were raised for that. And there was this amazing discovery in the late 1890s, where a farmer was ploughing a field in Egypt and started to uncover millions of mummified cats, millions. Then, it got, actually, pretty disgusting because the wind started blowing these remnants of cats around, and the stench was unbelievable. But many of these mummified cats had had their necks broken at like one or two months old. And so, it was like the ancient Egyptian cat version of a puppy mill, and they were creating them solely to sell them at the market. Some of this is hypothetical, but it makes sense. And you'd buy a cat mummy, and you'd give it to the god. JEYAN: Hmm. So, both good and bad... Bad, yeah. ...from the cat's point of view, anyway.

So, Jay, why did we decide to design our pets the way that we see them today? I'll give you one opinion, which I really respect, a book by a man named Yi-Fu Tuan, he's now dead, but he wrote a book about dominance and affection, the making of pets, and he likens the design of pets, and by that I mean creating new breeds, and really designing them, you know, the flat face is cuter than a long muzzle and all that stuff. He traces that back to the fact that humans have always treated even other humans as different, slaves, court jesters, little people who used to be, you know, kept around courts because they were unusual, and he said those are all examples of dominance. Interesting. Without, necessarily, affection, but absolute dominance. And then-- and then, he extends it to topiary, you know, in shaping plants and gardens, imposing the human view on nature. And then, he just says, "And the next step was pets." And although I'm-- these are not his words; these are mine. Although pets are almost always treated with affection, humans all have two sides, and it's quite possible in any human-pet relationship that the dominance side will overwhelm the affection side. And, um, it's just-- it's an unfortunate human attribute that we want to shape everything around us to our tastes, and our tastes evolve. And so, you know, the French Bulldog is one of the most popular dogs in the US. and a large percentage of them have health issues. Respiratory. Yeah. Yeah, they can't breathe. That's just the extreme. It's been pretty well demonstrated that, by and large, people do not choose a breed of dog for health of the dogs, for the reasons of the health of the dog. Instead, it's for looks or expressing yourself. So, you know, the guy with the Doberman is saying something different than me with my half-poodle, half-terrier. Hmm. You mentioned sloths. I want to talk a little bit about exotic pets. Well, they're hard to keep. Are they? Although, they don't need much exercise. That's what I imagined. You just check on them every couple of hours. I'm not going to be walking my sloth. Um, exotic pets, invasive species, there seems to be this obsession with a certain population of people who have an obsession of bringing animals that don't really belong in this environment. Where does that come from? So, there's many aspects to this. Remind me about the invasiveness, but just why would you want one? There are a lot of psychologists who are quite interested in this and have theories about why you would want to have a boa constrictor, or let's say a Burmese python, because they're the prototype bad example. There's a tendency to want to believe that people like that are kind of showing off. You know, so the endless videos of a guy in the New York subway with a giant snake around his neck. Like, what is he doing that for? Right. Well, the suspicion is he just wants you to notice him. Status. Yeah, exactly. And so, then, are they narcissistic? The thing is, when you look at the studies across the board of why people own unusual animals, it's not consistent. There are people that, I think, just like giant snakes, you know? And that applies all the way down to stag beetles that became a huge... Japan. ...hit in Japan a couple of decades ago. So, I would be very hesitant to say-- to sort of try and identify why people do that. I do think that there are some people who just want to have something slightly different. I had a pair of lizards at one point in my life, and, you know, they were pets, but I didn't have a relationship with them. You know, they weren't companions. I just was interested in watching them. So, I think the motivation is a bit of a mystery, and there need to be many more studies of that. When it comes to invasiveness, it's a huge issue, and the Burmese python is a good example. It was in 1979, the first one was discovered in the Florida Everglades. I just saw a video the other day where a Burmese python had vomited a whole deer. Oh. A deer! Like, and I'm not talking a fawn. I'm talking an adult female deer. And apparently the reason was, this is getting into trivia, but it's kind of cool, there'd been a cold snap, and so the snake's metabolism had slowed down, and it couldn't digest it, so it just got rid of it. So, you can see in the Everglades, where now the number of pythons is uncountable, raccoon populations have dropped 99%. Two or three other mammals have been depleted like that, too. And the other side of that is that animals like cotton rats that used to be preyed on by raccoons and so on are burgeoning. Interesting. So, I read a really interesting way of thinking about invasive species. This applies all the way down to insects. You know, I think the number is 520 different species of ants have been sold as pets. Okay, so, let's say you buy an ant-- I actually like the idea of ant colonies. You're thinking of getting one. Yeah, I'd get one, but I would make sure that it's an ant native to where I live. Hmm. And if you get an exotic ant, oh, and you know, that'd be cool. This ant is from Tasmania, right? Okay, great. What determines why such an ant would be sold around the world? Well, you have to capture them first. And so, that means they have two qualities, they're adaptable, and they're numerous, and they're... They're kind of generalists, right? So, they can survive anywhere. All right, well, what are the characteristics that make an ant invasive? They're generalists. They're survivors. And so, what you have is the pet trade, which is-- you know, a huge percentage of it is illegal. The pet trade selects those very animals that will be more likely to invade, successfully invade a new environment. It's a giant problem.

I want to pick up on a point that you mentioned earlier and it's something that you spend time in your book trying to define what a pet is, and you talk a little bit about when you're talking about the exotic pets, your lizard, for example, you would just sit and stare there. What is that relationship like? So, that's a tricky question, and I have some ideas about it. I think it may reside in the fact that how intelligent do you think this animal is? Like, do you think, in any small way, it can think like you think? Turtles? Like, I don't think so. Right? I mean, that's a bias. Right. I mean, maybe my turtle was crying out for a relationship with me, and I didn't give it a chance. He came up to you, probably, when you had some food in your hand, no? Nothing? Not quite. Lizards, the same, and then, you know, as you said, like, I like the idea of ant colonies. And so, I think there's a different way of relating to them. Dogs, cats, parrots, hamsters, you know, all those animals, especially the mammals, but parrots are super smart, you think of them as being like you, and maybe they do like you, maybe they do. I hope my cat likes me. And so, they're companions. Okay. Whereas others probably don't think about you much at all, especially if they're, like, in an aquarium and they can't wander around the house. And so, I would look at them as being interesting. Like an ant colony, I think this is an opportunity to see something that could be called a 'super organism'. You know, there's 10,000 ants in your colony, but they basically behave as an animal, one animal, gather food, reproduce, and so on. But they do it all by smell and taste. It's all chemical senses. Well, that's... You know, think about that. Like, here we are in Grange Park. What if people only related by smell and taste? It'd be a slightly different society than we have now. Be an interesting one. And I just think that's so powerful. I describe lots of instances in the book where the queen exerts control over the entire colony, and it's all by substances on her body that the other ants pick up with their antenna and then spread to other ants. And it's all, like, "No fertile females in my colony "because I'm the queen," kind of thing. So, I think it's perfectly legit to just be curious about another living thing, and that would legitimize an animal being a pet. You know, and it all comes down to a concept that the biologist E.O. Wilson first really made popular called biophilia, where he argued humans have an innate desire to interact with other living things, even plants, and insects, everything, amphibians, reptiles, and so on. And I think it underlies many of our relationships with animals, not just pets.

I want to talk science. Let's talk chemistry. Sure. When it comes to interacting with a dog or a cat, what happens to our bodies? So, the best known example of what happens is the hormone oxytocin, which is well known to facilitate bonding between a mother and her baby. It is also well known now that your dog, if you stare into your dog's eyes, a dog's oxytocin will rise, the human's oxytocin will rise. More recently, it's been shown that cats, the same, maybe not to the same degree, because I know you're a cat owner, and I know that you know that they have an independent streak that dogs do not have. But if you look into the eyes of a wolf, there's no oxytocin response at all. So, that's something, and you see it's-- you've got at least-- okay, oldest dog was 14,000. Let's say it started 20,000 years ago. 20,000 years of coevolution of humans and dogs, I mean, it would be shocking if there hadn't been changes, and there's been really good evidence. There was a great set of experiments done in the Soviet Union and then Russia on silver foxes. This guy, Belyayev, had a colony of them. He'd only let the most approachable ones mate, every year, 10%. In ten generations, he had foxes that would come up and lick your hand, and allow themselves to be petted, and they started to look different. They started to look-- you know, their ears used to be like this, they started to do this. Their colours changed. The way they held their tail changed. They started to look like dogs. And yet, they weren't being selected for any of those appearance things; they were being selected for tameness.

97% of Americans-- let me make sure I got this right... Yeah. Yeah. ...treat their pets like family members. Many people-- Well, they say-- they say they do. Many will say that they treat them like their children. Yeah. Why? (Scoffing) Because they're messed up. (Both laughing) Look, I mean, you know, anybody that owns a pet feels that very strong, compassionate relationship with the pet, and, you know, I think that's actually kind of extraordinary. I mean, I love my dog. I wouldn't discard my dog. But my wife would be pissed off if I said, "Yeah, he's pretty much the same." So, I'm not going to say that. But that study or a study very much like that, started asking further questions, like, "Well, how much? "How much is it a family member?" And I can't remember the exact numbers, but they range from 80%-- I'll try and do it in order, 80% down to about 60%. 80% would change their job if it interfered with keeping that pet. Seventy-some-odd percent would move. Seventy-some-odd percent would change roommates. 62%, and I do remember that number, would change their relationship. Okay, so... that's ridiculous. I don't think my parents would do any of those things for me, and I am their children. Yeah. Like... (Chuckling) No, I know. And I don't know if we're going to get to this, but there's also an issue, when your pet dies, how you deal with it, and there's a stark difference between how people treat a family member who unfortunately dies with-- compared to a pet that unfortunately dies. Jay, I've got one more question. We know that we will outlive our pets, yet we continue to devote so much to them. Why? I don't want to waffle again, but I think it's just-- it's just the extent of the relationship. So that-- and those animals that you think have become your companion, and you really think you understand, and they do things that you know they're gonna do, and they know you, I mean, it is a relationship. It's not, I don't think, equal to a human-- family relationship, but it's a relationship nonetheless. And I think animals that-- like, if your goldfish dies, well, it's unfortunate, but you probably just... you know, some people flush them down the toilet, and that's it, you know? Oh, and here's a little bit of a twist. People that are empathetic-- let me back up one step. Scientists are always interested in, is it possible to do a better job of matching a human with a pet? So, if the human has certain personality characteristics and the dog or cat does, you know, maybe that's a bad match. Empathy sounds like a great... quality to have. But the human with the most empathy is going to suffer with that pet, especially when it dies. And so, you know, there's always two sides to that coin. And the other part of this is, what are your choices when your pet dies? Most people-- well, I don't know if most, but many people have them buried or cremated. Yep. You can also have it freeze-dried or taxidermied. Both of those... are a little bit eerie to me. Or actually, you can also have a paw print. Yes, yes, yep. I mean, there's many ways of doing it. Those are quite touching and, um... But I don't feel I need those to remember my previous dog, you know? I remember him as a living, moving creature. And so, I don't really have any-- any-- well, we do have a paw print. Okay, I'll admit that. Aww. Okay, there you go. But I got interested in the whole freeze-drying/taxidermy thing because there are people that want to, not just preserve the dead animal, but in a pose that is very familiar... Right. ...which you can do with freeze-drying. It takes months to properly do it, but you can do it. But taxidermy, at least the taxidermists I've talked to, will not do that because, you know, good taxidermists are artists, they really are, and they are faced with an animal that they knew nothing about, and two humans, or one human, whatever, that knows that animal intimately, and you've got to produce a taxidermied version that satisfies them. And the risk is very high that what you produce is not quite what they wanted, and then, they're disappointed. And as one taxidermist told me, it's like their pet has died twice. And they are reluctant to do it, not every taxidermist will do it, and they'll charge a bundle just because it's more trouble than it is worth to them. Jay, it's been a pleasure. Hey, thank you. Thank you so much. Really appreciate it. We can talk for hours, I'm pretty sure. We damn well could. Oh, sorry. No, that's all right. Oh, you guys are still here. Oh, didn't know. (Both laughing)