Like I said, I’ve come to realise that there’s a recurring ambivalence to dogs in that they’re not just merely half wild, half domesticated (there are far more stray dogs out there in the world and more owned dogs that aren’t so socialised to their owners). But that dogs can be used to deter pests yet become pests themselves. Be it killing or attacking people, doing the same to livestock and wildlife alike, ruining human belongings and causing diseases.
I suspect this might unconsciously deconstruct why Ivorian Bengs and Aka Pygmies as well as Koranic and Biblical writers find dogs bewildering and dubious at times. The fact that some commentators assumed Biblical dogs to be pariahs is really on the nose. Though it could also be attributed to carelessness, like I said there might be more owned dogs that aren’t so socialised to humans and domestic dogs are capable of hunting prey without human intervention.
I even have one dog that killed lizards and another that eats both lizards and frogs. It seems the dog’s predatory tendencies aren’t entirely forgotten in historical folklore, especially with regards to the Wild Hunt. If Jesus’s a shepherd with his flock, logically as dogs aren’t apparently well-liked in the Bible the Devil would be accompanied by a dog pack. Dogs aren’t entirely disliked in the Bible.
There are some cases, especially the Story of Tobit, where they’re either liked or at least tolerated. Though it does bring up the possibility whether if Biblical and Koranic writers as well as Aka Pgymies and Beng were more well-aware of canine predation sans human intervention and dogs’ wilder tendencies than most would realise.