Talk:List of domesticated animals

Gayal Removal

I propose the Gayal be removed from the list, but I would prefer someone with more experience do it. The wikipedia description for Gayal only lists it as "semi-domesticated," which should not be on this list. It is unsourced, even in that claim, and unsourced for date of domestication. This is a list of animals we have concrete domestication archaeological records on, and I guess modern well sourced exemplars. The Gayal fits neither description, best I can tell.Johnfromtheprarie (talk)

More semidomesticated cleanup

Now that we've gone through a round of deletions, I'd like to suggest another round of improvement: gathering citations for each taxon to demonstrate widespread commercial use. These can be taken from the animal's own articles where applicable. Every species that currently lacks a good citation (including if their article lacks citations) would be tagged with Template:Citation needed in the meantime - not deleted yet, but I think it should be clear where evidence of common human use is needed. Thoughts? Shuvuuia (talk) 18:50, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Sounds fair to me. Though I wouldn't necessarily restrict it only to things with widespread *commercial* use, just... widespread human use that isn't either simple predation, or use of purely wild-caught animals (outside of the elephant exception). If there are a substantial number of hobby breeders of a particular pet, for example, I think that qualifies an animal even if there isn't particularly widespread actual commercial use. But, same basic idea. Tamtrible (talk) 10:38, 30 September 2023 (UTC)

Eagles

The article lists the Golden and Bald eagles under the "Tame, partially domesticated, and widely captive-bred animals" with the location listed for the Golden eagle as "Europe, North America, Kazakhstan, Mongolia, Africa, Australia", and the Bald eagle location is "North America, Europe, Russia, Africa, Australia" and the purpose for both as "falconry, intercepting, pest control, show, pets"

These need to be edited for corrections. Various laws protect many birds beginning with the Lacey Act of 1900 (amended in 2008) and the Weeks–McLean Act of 1918.

The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 was the beginning of protection in the US and Canada. The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668d, 1940) included two eagles offering complete protection, with the only exceptions being by permits. The act is supported by international conventions with Canada, Japan, Mexico and Russia. The Golden eagle is critically Endangered in the Czech Republic and Albania, where future protection laws are likely.

references

• management guidelines -- Otr500 (talk) 00:35, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Feel free to edit those entries. Our cleanup hasn't gotten that far, but I kind of suspected that those eagle entries would end up on the chopping block. Please, eg, check the pages for each animal, to see if there's evidence that they were historically captive bred, before deleting. Tamtrible (talk) 01:56, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Bearded Dragon

Don't forget these pets as domesticated 2601:14B:4180:12E1:547D:ABF3:F64B:5409 (talk) 00:04, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Elephants

Someone has once again submitted elephants as "partially domesticated", but this is not true, according to my +30 years research on captive elephants, published with database at my website Elephant Encyclopedia at https://www.elephant.se, a website used On Wikipedia on numerous articles as reference for elephant details. I definitely argue that "are at least somewhat altered from wild-type animals due to their extensive interactions with humans" can NOT be applied on any individual elephant, since we have "altered" nothing. I have a few individuals in my database that are 8th or 9th generation, but this does NOT mean that ANYTHING with them is altered, and its too less time to provide any kind of indication of domestication, and apart from this, those elephants are fewer than 10 individuals. Elephants should absolutely be removed from that list, immediately. Dan Koehl (talk) 07:09, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

If you want to update their status to something like "enslaved", feel free, but we definitely have a *very* long relationship with Asian elephants, that is not simply predation. So, even if we have not actually directly captive bred them outside of zoos, we have likely altered their reproduction at least slightly, if only in which individuals we enslave vs leave free. Tamtrible (talk) 19:10, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

IM sorry, but domestication is a biological, scientific term. "Enslaved" is a political term, which reflects humans opinions about things, but has zero connection to biology and science. True domesticated animals can scientifically be confirmed, by analyzing their DNA. Whatever relation you refer to with "very" long relationship, the DNA of elephants have no idea what you speak about. 250 Africans are presently tame, while some 500 000 elephants are not. 1/3 of Asian elephants are tame, and 2/3 of the species Elephas maximus were never tamed. Laymen like to try make science into some sort of game of guessing, which it isnt. Science is a about evidence. There is ZERO evidence that humans have altered elephants reproduction even slightly. the first documented elephant bred in captivity was 1902 in London Zoo. Since then some 7 generations have been produced, of such a small total number that its not comparable to the 40 000 wild Asian elephants who never had anything to do with humans. 2A00:801:7A6:D972:64B1:C68B:FDB3:D36C (talk) 20:45, 18 June 2025 (UTC)