Can dogs survive in the wilderness better/easier than cats?

When seeing enough stray cats outside I began to wonder how cats survive out in the wilderness. Which lead to me wondering about dogs survival techniques. I'm sure cats and dogs wouldn't last long at all. I'm also sure this question is dumb. But possibly a comparison to who would survive longer could do.Can dogs survive in the wilderness better/easier than cats?
Dogs have been socialized so much to mankind that they would not do as well out in the wilderness without us. Cats stay aloof, so I suspect they'd do much better in the wild. -!-
Both of them can survive equally. I mean, think about it:

Dogs Sniff: Cats have super eye vision

Dogs Have sharp teeth: Cats have claws

Dogs are strong: Cats run fast

Dogs and cats are alert

Dogs are friendly and can sometimes be TOO friendly

Cats are aggressive and can sometimes reject HELP

Dogs MAKE good shelter out of anything

Cats can FIND simple places and live there



Although youngsters are endangered of being run over by a car, eaten by a bigger dog/cat.



So they're equal.Can dogs survive in the wilderness better/easier than cats?
depends on the dog breeds



cats have some initial advantages such as better night-sight, ability to climb trees to escape threats, moving very silently, etc etc.



However the biggest advantage of cats is that they specialize in lone hunter vs small animals. So one stray cat has the ideal 'pack size' AND their prey of small animals such as mice are very abundant.



Dogs on the other hand are pack hunters, so a lone dog is at a disadvantage. Also, dogs are more designed to take on large prey...and there really aren't many larger prey wandering around most urban areas. As far as taking on smaller prey like squirrels and rabbits, dogs who have a strong prey drive for small animals often end up killing cats, so this trait has been bred out of many dogs.



However, there are some exceptions. Sled dogs tend to have a very strong 'small animal prey drive' this is because in many areas during when the snow melted sled dogs were just untied and left to survive on their own. Come winter they were tied up and fed again and pulled the dogsleds.



So a cat has a better chance of surviving in an American City than most dogs, while a large nordic dog is probably the best equipped to survive in the woods.



NOTE in urban areas where there is much less infrastructure especially no city garbage collection and dog catchers dogs DO thrive by living off of garbage. And in such cities you'll rarely find a cat wandering because the dogs will eat the cats. Often these dogs are living within a city but are basically wild animals, having lived generation after generation as scroungers with no human owners. Sometimes they are good at begging for food and seem friendly, yet other dogs are very aggressive toward humans and will never beg but rather attack if you get too close.
Not a dumb question at all. I wish I could give you a link, or even remember where I read it, but I did read a article on feral dogs, and how they survive. As others have pointed out, breed has a lot to do with it, a pitt bull is gonna do better then a mini-pom. Other factors in the article were habitat, like a wild husky in canada is gonna do better then a mastiff. Forming a pack with other dogs was a key element to successful survival. What was really interesting is how dogs "undeveloped" over time. Meaning after several generations, they start to lose the specialization man has breed, and depending on location, start to look the same. One wild pack in the southeast they tracked, after a good long while (dozen generations) looked something like rhodesian ridge backs, even though the original pack was a wide mix of everything. Another wild pack in the north west, after many generations, looked very wolf/husky like. But the DNA showed all kinds of dog breeds.

So, I think you would find it interesting, I feel stupid for not remembering where I got the information. But maybe you could google it. Still a good question on your part. Star for you!

Have a great day.

EDIT: Had to come back, I almost forgot, my favorite quote in the article "nature favors the generalist over the specialist". So a basic, well rounded dog has a better chance then a specialized dog.
As far as cats or dogs, it would probably be dogs. Cats are leaner, better hunters that require less food and smaller places for shelter. However dogs are stronger and more powerful. They can sniff out their food, and arent afraid to dig after eat or eat some nasty dead thing. Dogs tend to stay healthier, and are less prone to colds and things of that nature. In my opinion, dogs would definately outlast cats. I suppose though, it may be a matter of opinion since it is probably a really close tie.
Cats survive better and have become a bigger problem because of it. A lot of wild bird species are disappearing because of feral cats. The havoc they cause is not as widely reported because they keep to themselves and don't cause media worthy problems like dog packs that attack someone or tear up your garbage can. The solution? Kitten McNuggets!
Depends on the breed. A Maine Coon or Norwegian Forest cat would have few problems in the wild vs for example a Chihuahua or a Pug. Cats have another advantage, they are natural food hunters and are smaller so they need to catch less food. Dogs have been bred to do many tasks, but only a few are bred to hunt for something the dog can expect to eat.
i think cat would last long in the wilderness because cat could run fast and cat are not friendly. dog are friendly to every animals in wood that might be danger like cayote. Cayote pretend like they are your friend once they had a chance they will eat you with your eyes open.
House cats are better suited for survival in the wilderness because they're naturally more independent than a dog. Also, there aren't very many breeds of cat that have been bred to be totally useless in favor of having a cool look, like bulldogs.