Questions for bully & APBTA 'type' owners

Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
94,266
Likes
3
Points
36
Location
Where the selas blooms
When I see someone in the show ring with a dog straining at the leash and acting a fool while the owner stands there and laughs, I think the owner looks like a fool as well. At least try to control your dog. Having owned a screamer myself, I understand the challenge. However, it was my job to exert control over my dog. I don't care that he was DA or really that he wanted to eat other dogs, I cared that he had no respect for me (at first) and thought it acceptable to ignore me and continue doing what he wanted to do. That is what wasn't acceptable.
:eek: Owning one myself . . . although she doesn't appear to be screaming to get at the other dogs, they can walk right by her and she doesn't initiate any extra reaction (other than her ear-shattering screaming). Hers is pure excitement, which could easily escalate into a brawl if she and I allowed it. It's been a mutual effort. She's had to learn to exert some self-control as well. But I don't see us ever doing any sort of activity where she'd be loose with other dogs.

Yes, there's a bit of passing envy for the people whose dogs are sitting quietly, being "shells," lol. ;) I wouldn't trade her or change her, but yes, there's a bit of inherent humiliation that goes with owning Tallulah. Just part of the package :eek:
 

Miakoda

New Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
7,666
Likes
0
Points
0
Not necessarily. I'm asking a specific set of questions; In post #298, do you consider the first dog and the third dog to be APBTs? Why, or why not, by your logic? If not, what are they, by your logic? If you do agree that the first dog posted, and the third dog posted are both APBTs, explain to me how the dual registered dog in the last photo is not an APBT.

This isn't about SBTs. This conundrum is unique to APBTs because up until the past couple years, the UKC itself considered the APBT and AST to be the same breed.


The UKC is a for-profit canine registry. They'll continue to do what's in their best financial interest.

Since when did registries become the authority on a breed's best interest? People have given them that power...put them and the show ring judges upon pedastals...and look where it's gotten the dogs themselves.

I think there's a huge division amongst working dog owners and bred-for-looks and the show ring dog owners in almost all breeds (where it's applicable). That division will never go away, especially with the push to breed more pet-quality dogs with watered-down standards to make them a better fit for the average Joe Shmoe.

I still know hunters that cull their prospective Catahoulas and Catahoulas Bulldogs by shooting those upcoming dogs that have no drive or ability to do the job(s) for which they're bred. Same could be said for a few other breeds, seeing as how I live in a state known for being a "Sportsman's Paradise". These people stand firm in their belief those dogs should be able working dogs first and pets second. By believing so, they've become targets for others who believe being pet quality and show quality is better and more humane.

IMO, I feel nothing will change the current path of the APBT. I believe the extremes will continue to dominate (meaning breeding for oversized dogs). I believe bybreeding will continue to dominate. I believe more and more unqualified/irresponsible/ignorant/willfully ignorant/bleeding heart owners will dominate as the owners of these dogs. I believe people will continue to push for the banning of hog hunting with the dogs (we fought and won the right to continue hunting in Louisiana, but it's actually illegal to basically train your dog, as you cannot have a catch dog and a hog and an enclosure/pen all at the same location). I believe we will continue to see an increase in "pit bull" attacks, both dog on dog (thanks to dog parks and owners refusing to contain/restrain their dogs) and dog-on-human bites and attacks (mainly due to the increasing breeding of poor quality dogs with unstable temperaments, people letting such dogs run loose, and bleeding hearts who rescue/own such dogs and continue to put them in stressful social situations where failure is the dog's only possible outcome). I think we will continue to see more bans and BSL being enacted, despite the few victories that were recently won. While those were being repealed, twice as many cities/towns passed such legislation either banning or severely restricting ownership of "pit bulls ". I believe the future of these dogs is irreparably tainted, if not permanently damaged.

It doesn't mean I'll ever quit fighting BSL or loving the dogs, but for the first time in my life, I feel inside that it is a slow-moving losing battle. How can it not be when it's the "pit bull" owners themselves destroying the dogs, and even reinforcing the perception that the dogs are vicious monsters until they're properly "rehabilitated"?
 
Last edited:

Miakoda

New Member
Joined
Oct 22, 2006
Messages
7,666
Likes
0
Points
0
Envy is fair, insulting is not. To assume these dogs are less work, or a "shell, is hilarious and down right offensive.
I talked about this somewhere (maybe this thread?), but the vast majority of my dogs were quiet and intense. To the untrained/ignorant eye, they were just placid dogs out for a walk. But their body language said something entirely different. Mine rarely barked, even in play. Growls were even more rare. They were quiet, and if you allowed yourself to be lulled into a false sense of security, you'd find yourself breaking up a dog fight.

I had a friend bring his dog over to walk with us on several occasions, and he used to laugh at how laid back and passive my dogs were. Then one day he scooted to far over to us, and his dog was now in reach. Before I could even react, my dog had lunged and grabbed his by the side of the face. He had a breakstick, and I got her off pretty quickly (thankfully it wasn't a hold that allowed his dog to get a return hold). The damage was minimal. But it served as a reminder that we had to be one-step ahead in any situation, and not allow complacency to set in.
 

Tahla9999

Active Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2008
Messages
1,105
Likes
0
Points
36
The UKC is a for-profit canine registry. They'll continue to do what's in their best financial interest.

Since when did registries become the authority on a breed's best interest? People have given them that power...put them and the show ring judges upon pedastals...and look where it's gotten the dogs themselves.

I think there's a huge division amongst working dog owners and bred-for-looks and the show ring dog owners in almost all breeds (where it's applicable). That division will never go away, especially with the push to breed more pet-quality dogs with watered-down standards to make them a better fit for the average Joe Shmoe.

I still know hunters that cull their prospective Catahoulas and Catahoulas Bulldogs by shooting those upcoming dogs that have no drive or ability to do the job(s) for which they're bred. Same could be said for a few other breeds, seeing as how I live in a state known for being a "Sportsman's Paradise". These people stand firm in their belief those dogs should be able working dogs first and pets second. By believing so, they've become targets for others who believe being pet quality and show quality is better and more humane.

IMO, I feel nothing will change the current path of the APBT. I believe the extremes will continue to dominate (meaning breeding for oversized dogs). I believe bybreeding will continue to dominate. I believe more and more unqualified/irresponsible/ignorant/willfully ignorant/bleeding heart owners will dominate as the owners of these dogs. I believe people will continue to push for the banning of hog hunting with the dogs (we fought and won the right to continue hunting in Louisiana, but it's actually illegal to basically train your dog, as you cannot have a catch dog and a hog and an enclosure/pen all at the same location). I believe we will continue to see an increase in "pit bull" attacks, both dog on dog (thanks to dog parks and owners refusing to contain/restrain their dogs) and dog-on-human bites and attacks (mainly due to the increasing breeding of poor quality dogs with unstable temperaments, people letting such dogs run loose, and bleeding hearts who rescue/own such dogs and continue to put them in stressful social situations where failure is the dog's only possible outcome). I think we will continue to see more bans and BSL being enacted, despite the few victories that were recently won. While those were being repealed, twice as many cities/towns passed such legislation either banning or severely restricting ownership of "pit bulls ". I believe the future of these dogs is irreparably tainted, if not permanently damaged.

It doesn't mean I'll ever quit fighting BSL or loving the dogs, but for the first time in my life, I feel inside that it is a drawn our losing battle. How can it not be when it's the "pit bull" owners themselves destroying the dogs, and even reinforcing the perception that the dogs are vicious monsters until they're properly "rehabilitated"?
Oh, don't forget the people who have no problems breeding fighting human aggressive pit bulls and sending the puppies all over the world. How many litters does this boy have again?


http://www.yacuza.net/dogs/males/indian/indian.html

ETA Even though we don't agree with the direction the APBT should go, I think we can all agree that something needs to be done before more and more places continue to ban them. Its frustrating that so many apartment complexes ban them and how some insurance company refuse owners with them. Its frightening to think of the future, but lets not lose all hope.
 
Last edited:
S

SevenSins

Guest
Ok, so we've established that the goal of matching dogs was to prove gameness. And...then what? What purpose did gameness serve that you needed to prove it so badly? And what about matching a dog to another DOG proved it so well? Why isn't hog hunting seen as a valid way to prove gameness? I mean, a hog is what, three or four times the dog's size, with giant tusks (the better to gore them with), keen intelligence, formidable strength and the battle ground is a whole forest they know like the back of their hoof. But yet, putting two dogs of comparable size, strength and intelligence in a small ring together where they have nowhere to go but at each other is the BEST way to test gameness? It seems to me a dog would have to be pretty dam* badass to chase a wild dog, corner it, bite it, and hold on as the giant pissed off creature fights for its life with everything it's got.

I can't support dog fighting because I don't see the purpose of it. Hog hunting I can see, hogs are overrunning parts of the US, plus I hear they taste pretty good. Can't eat them myself, stomach issues, but I won't stand in somebody's way if they like some good wild-caught meat.
I can see arguments for and against the use of hog hunting as a tool for testing the gameness of an APBT; Dog fighting was never meant to necessarily watch two dogs kill each other. Testing against other, equally matched dogs is the "best" method because the fights tend to be drawn out long enough to push the dogs to their breaking point and give a better overall picture of the dog's heart and will to continue despite pain and exhaustion. That is gameness in a nutshell. Again, the goal wasn't necessarily for one dog to kill the other despite the fact that it occasionally happens. Hogs would be a decent test of gameness, if it wasn't for the fact that if you leave a single dog on a hog long enough, the dog is going to get gored to death...the hog has the unfair advantage of several hundred pounds and a set of built in daggers. You can armor up your dog with all kinds of catch vests and collars, but then you're taking away one of the key aspects of proving a dog game.

However... Since that level of gameness can only be proven in the box, and the only purpose for the trait to exist at that level is also in the box, there isn't much of a reason to test for or select for it in modern society aside from preservation of a trait simply for the sake of preservation, and illusion of prestige. Don't get me wrong, I do think gameness is an important trait... But what practical purpose does it serve in 2012 to own a dog so deeply game that it will go 2 hours against another dog?

Just some things to ponder. I have a very unique view of the APBT and very little to me is a simple black and white issue. I see and understand both sides.
 

Pops2

Active Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
3,072
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
UT
Pops2, go back and read post #298. I'm curious as to how you would answer that. I've proposed the same question many times to many people, and most "APBT" people won't touch it, because it locks them into a catch-22 that they don't want to be in.
you missed the point of post 314.
1. alot of people are either unclear about what a breed is or don't care
2. looks are NOT the ONLY defining factor of a breed, which is why we have both the drathaar & the german wirehair, or the fox, parson russel & Jack russell terriers. to some people the difference in personality is more important than the difference in looks (or lack thereof).
 
S

SevenSins

Guest
you missed the point of post 314.
2. looks are NOT the ONLY defining factor of a breed, which is why we have both the drathaar & the german wirehair, or the fox, parson russel & Jack russell terriers. to some people the difference in personality is more important than the difference in looks (or lack thereof).
I never said appearance was the only defining characteristic of a breed. But you've still managed to avoid actually addressing the questions I posed...it's that whole catch-22 thing, and it's uncomfortable.
 

Pops2

Active Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
3,072
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
UT
Oh, LOL, the shell of a dog argument, that's another awesome one. Did you know my Malinois are boring, driveless, shells because they can perform an obedience routine around other dogs?

o_O robots baby, control makes dawgs into ROBOTS. Drink the koolaide.
the mal was NOT bred to fight other dogs, so it's ability to work undistracted by other dogs is NOT a failing but a plus.
 

Pops2

Active Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
3,072
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
UT
Ok, so we've established that the goal of matching dogs was to prove gameness. And...then what? What purpose did gameness serve that you needed to prove it so badly? And what about matching a dog to another DOG proved it so well? Why isn't hog hunting seen as a valid way to prove gameness? I mean, a hog is what, three or four times the dog's size, with giant tusks (the better to gore them with), keen intelligence, formidable strength and the battle ground is a whole forest they know like the back of their hoof. But yet, putting two dogs of comparable size, strength and intelligence in a small ring together where they have nowhere to go but at each other is the BEST way to test gameness? It seems to me a dog would have to be pretty dam* badass to chase a wild dog, corner it, bite it, and hold on as the giant pissed off creature fights for its life with everything it's got.

I can't support dog fighting because I don't see the purpose of it. Hog hunting I can see, hogs are overrunning parts of the US, plus I hear they taste pretty good. Can't eat them myself, stomach issues, but I won't stand in somebody's way if they like some good wild-caught meat.
only dogs & people will continue to fight after they have lost (although there is some indication jaguars & ocelots will try but they are relatively fragile). nearly all animals even big predators like bears will seek to run more than fight & when the option of running is exhausted they will offer a limited fight & then just lay down to be killed. so the ONLY way to consistantly test gameness is by matching two relatively game dogs to find out which is more game.
 
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
94,266
Likes
3
Points
36
Location
Where the selas blooms
the mal was NOT bred to fight other dogs, so it's ability to work undistracted by other dogs is NOT a failing but a plus.
I think this is part of what's at the heart of much of the trouble in the Pitbull world. You have people who love the look, or some aspect of the personality, but want a dog that, other than one or two characteristics, is entirely different than what the APBT has been bred to be over so many generations. They don't want an APBT, not really, so they want to change it, finding fault with the parts of the breed that don't suit them.

It's become a diverse type, for better or worse, and now we have to deal with it somehow, whether it's by dividing and labeling the different types . . . or something else. I don't know.

Ego gets in the way and everyone else's dogs/breed gets smack talked against because they don't live up to what someone else wants. :rolleyes: Do we all think our breed is the most special, wonderful on the planet? Sure! As it should be. But denigrating other breeds or types won't make ours more special or better. Yeah. My own dogs are the best. FOR ME. And Adrianne's are the best. FOR HER. Staci's for her, Pops' for him . . .

Some of the hardcore, APBT = real dog/AmStaff = fake APBT who get up in arms about dual registries and the public equating one with the other might stand back and take a good look at how much GOOD these "watered down shells" are doing for the Pitbull type's image in the public eye. They're far more commonly seen by the general public, being AKCed, and, overall, represent the type in a way that the public can accept, even embrace, not that the APBT couldn't, but face it, there's a real stigma attached -- unjustly -- to the name. I will wager that many of the people who recoiled from Tallulah and have called her an assortment of nasty names wouldn't have batted an eyelash if I'd told them she was a Staffy.
 

AdrianneIsabel

Glutton for Crazy
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
8,893
Likes
0
Points
0
Location
Portland, Oregon
The "it's not a real APBT if it's not a dog reactive fool" or "you're not a good APBT owner if you expect your dog to maintain composure" mentality is damning.

Those thoughts are holding this breed from being embraced in modern society.

And thus ensues the infighting.
 

Pops2

Active Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
3,072
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
UT
I never said appearance was the only defining characteristic of a breed. But you've still managed to avoid actually addressing the questions I posed...it's that whole catch-22 thing, and it's uncomfortable.
i've never seen them in the box so i can't say which is the real pit bulldog
 

Pops2

Active Member
Joined
Sep 21, 2008
Messages
3,072
Likes
0
Points
36
Location
UT
So an APBT (or Amstaff) that can work around other dogs is a failure? Just trying to understand your logic.
nope, just saying that a dog of a breed NOT designed for battling other dogs NOT showing DA is NOT a shell of a dog
been plenty of champions that were cold until dropped in the box and got cold again once you picked them up.
BUT a dog that is 100% cold 100% of the time is NOT a pit bulldog and a lot of people would like pit bulldog & APBT to be 100% synonymous. i tend to lean that way but i'm not 100% committed to the idea.
 

stafinois

Professional Nerd
Joined
May 11, 2009
Messages
1,617
Likes
1
Points
0
Location
Mayberry
The "it's not a real APBT if it's not a dog reactive fool" or "you're not a good APBT owner if you expect your dog to maintain composure" mentality is damning.

Those thoughts are holding this breed from being embraced in modern society.

And thus ensues the infighting.

And thus seals the coffin.
 
S

SevenSins

Guest
i've never seen them in the box so i can't say which is the real pit bulldog
So your opinion then is that NO dog can be called APBT unless it's been in the pit? Then what do you propose we call the other 90%? ;)
 

Members online

No members online now.
Top