Puppy Forum and Dog Forums banner
61 - 80 of 91 Posts
Heck I think of something like the Bull or Neopolitan Mastiff when I hear the term Mastiff. I know the Molosser is considered by some to be a common ancestor of both the Mastiff type and the Bull and Terriers pitbulls descend from.
I think of those too...but the Boxer IS a Molosser..

On another note, there was one civilian police advisor (the sort of guy who trains Iraqi policemen and who works as a police officer in South Central LA) I've spoken to who said he's had to deal with tons of badly bred pits, usually property of illegal dogfighters or drug dealers. He's one of those guys who says pits tend to turn on their owners (I don't believe this, it's about training and knowing your pooch no matter what or who he is) and also he's had to put down pits that have attacked him whilst on calls or counter-narcotics raids. Can bad breeding/abuse be treated in most pits? I've heard horror stories throughout the web of rescued ex-fighting pits who've turned on their new masters. Are these true or mostly chaff?
yes. I think I mentioned in this thread that I do pit rescue.

I rehab those who have issues. I do it almost every day.

the thing is...any dog can turn on its owner...if the owner treats it like dirt...and that includes *trying* to make it aggressive. its just that due to the sheer numbers of pit and pit mixes and bullies..and their image as a "tough dog" and such...you get more of those instances.

the fix?

rehab and alter those that can be rehabbed and find them *qualified* homes.

educate people on responsible dog ownership.

Only breed those pits with high quality temperment and structure and ability. Sell only to *qualified* homes.

Make laws regarding dog ownership in general more punitive. but not breed specific...like for example...no one gave me a spot on the news any of the seven times i've been attacked by nasty German Shepherds. No one gave my mom a spot on the news when she had fingers removed due to a golden retriever bite. Breed specific laws ignore the other victims. that's wrong.

www.nationalcanineresearchcouncil.com

a good link on dog bites.
 
I seem to remember molossers were very valuable amongst Phoenecian traders who journeyed all over the ancient world, including the FC. The dogs were so valued that they were even a form of trading currency and when the Phoenecians reached the British Isles the dogs were mated with mastiffs of the area to create the ancestors of the Bull and Terrier as well.

It sounds like there are pit type dogs that live in the Fertile Crescent. The one by the Iraqi police station is a sort of pet for the policemen and likes to snack on scraps we'll feed him when we pass by it on patrol. It will bark whenever people that aren't Iraqi police or US troops show up too.

Even the Romans used the molossers as pit fighters too. Roman cruelty was not just toward their fellow humans. The ancestors of pits fought in the Colosseum it seems.

So would some rate Pits as Mastiff types as well? A fellow soldier and amateur dog enthusiast says Pits are basically miniature Mastiffs. I don't agree, frankly. I wonder what other pit fanciers think of that statement.
I've read the same of Phoenecians having dogs as well. These dogs being bred with Mastiff of British Isles where did the dogs of the Brits come from? The ancient molossers are said to be the ancestors of those and other mastiffs.

As for the ancestor of the bull / terrier I've heard some theories. Though it is most probable that bulldogs went back to the molossers. Bulldogs were considered small mastiffs, but it is a dog of different type then the typical mastiffs we think of today. A bulldog also would not always mean a specific breed. It was a butchers dog or a bull baiting dog. This would be true of terriers also, different terriers were bred together early on and some bred within different regions (which is how some came to be named) within a closed gene pool which turned into types/lines/breeds.

Romans certainly made use of the molosser dogs. It seems in many types of contest. Today the bully kutta is still a larger type fighting breed. One that is agile, slender built but big and powerful.

There are also the Great Danes. Today many are bred only for show and many do not have the same temperament they had really not all that long ago it seems. From what I observe people (Dane breeders and the like) do not want them known as guardians nor hunters, ect.

Molossers have spread throughout the world in one way or another. I would not however call Pit Bulls a mini mastiff. To me they do not have the quality of a mastiff nor do they have blood of modern mastiff breeds.

On another note, there was one civilian police advisor (the sort of guy who trains Iraqi policemen and who works as a police officer in South Central LA) I've spoken to who said he's had to deal with tons of badly bred pits, usually property of illegal dogfighters or drug dealers. He's one of those guys who says pits tend to turn on their owners (I don't believe this, it's about training and knowing your pooch no matter what or who he is) and also he's had to put down pits that have attacked him whilst on calls or counter-narcotics raids. Can bad breeding/abuse be treated in most pits? I've heard horror stories throughout the web of rescued ex-fighting pits who've turned on their new masters. Are these true or mostly chaff?
I'm sure as a police officer in the city he's had to deal with a lot of badly bred and trained Pits. They are popular with gangs as fighting dogs and protection dogs. They are also utilized as guard dogs of drug houses (though some are actually quite friendly and are of no threat to trespassers/police officers, unfortunately others really are vicious junk yard type guard dogs).

Pits in general do not tend to turn on their owners. But they can turn on their owner/family just like any other breed. A lot of dog owners (not breed specific but Pits included) do not have the most stable dogs or the dog has an issue that isn't being addressed. When this is ignored or goes unnoticed it isn't resolved then the dog finally attacks whether that is someone in the family or outside the family. This happens in all breeds and in dogs from varying environments from small to large dogs in a nice family setting treated with kindness to a dog that has never been treated right. Dogs that are badly abused tend to fear people and fear their owners too much to turn on them but some might be more likely to attack others out of fear.

I would say the stories are mostly BS. A lot of the lies of Pit Bulls and fighting dogs myths are perpetuated by the HSUS. So while their are bad in the bunch without a doubt, you can't deny that, dogs that aren't culled that should have been most game/game bred dogs have solid temperaments. I've met a few man aggressive Pits and the majority were not that of game breeding. Overall I've had only one dangerous of all the Pits I've owned. Truly a screw loose with that dog. The good nature, stability, trustworthiness with humans of the breed comes from being pit dogs so it is illogical to think that it would at the same time make them untrustworthy, it'd be like a contradiction. There is no way I believe that most of my dogs ancestors were dangerous or that they did/would turn on their owners. I also find it ironic that when the heat came on pit fighting and it started to be outlawed soon followed the time when they started to become known as aggressive, dangerous dogs. Not previously when these pit dogs were known for also being good family pets, great dogs with children and dogs of courage. Look at Petey of the Our Gang comedies, I'm sure no one looked down on him for his breed, nor fretted that the children were in danger. The same of his GR CH pit fighting sire. Pit Bulls were not considered to be "bred to attack and kill" "unpredictable and vicious" until later on after the dog fighting crack down.

None of my ex fighters have ever had anything but friendly temperaments to humans, some very over friendly. I also say overall stability is there. Though to be honest there is an exception but then she was badly abused so she was fearful of people. Still not the lease bit aggressive. Only taking forever to trust us, then was like a totally different dog (with us, happy, playful she learned to play). But with people she did not know she would try to hide or just stand very still. She did warm up to one pit/dog lover immediately, it was awesome to see. Then she also went on to not behave so skittishly at vet visits. Her temperament has nothing to do with fighting and more to do with the physical abuse she received from her previous owner. I also don't know of her early handling/socialization which I imagine was probably just as terrible. When bad things happen early on they can be more damaging in some dogs. Even neglect can cause fear and other issues.

A lot of people want to be blind to the good nature of these dogs. The Vick dogs helped to change some minds going into pet homes with success and Leo becoming a therapy. Only 1 was put down for bad temperament out of all of them. And we know from the accounts that these dogs were horribly abused and neglected. It is true that some are still at a sanctuary, the worst cases and those that would not adapt so quickly, it is not due to aggression.
You must consider the abuse/neglect they suffered. It is not really different then puppy mill rescues, some are put down because of temperament or they take lots of time to rehab. If you lock a dog away for its whole life, like Vick did or others do, the dog does not know how to act around people nor how to interact with them. Humans are more complex but if you do this to a child you get just the same, the child would not know how to behave, how to interact with other people, how to play. Dogs are not as complex, much more resilient and much easier to rehab. They can learn and adjust quicker.

I do not think a true man aggressive temperament by blood can be "treated" if it is the type that is unpredictable. Without a cause for the dogs aggression nor a trigger to know of. There really is no basis to work with. At least I'm not risking this myself nor put my families life in that type of danger.

ETA
Dog aggression and human aggression are 2 different things. Aggression to humans in this breed is seen for a number of reasons. Even in dogs not from abusive homes, even those who think they treat their dogs perfect and their dog will always be an angel. Pit Bulls can become DA and are perfectly capable of attacking other dogs/starting fights all on their own even if it is the last thing they want their owner to do. There is no reason to think that setting a dog in a pit and allowing them to do this will some how turn them into a dog that will attack their family. Whether the dog fights and the owner wants it to or the dog fights and the owner doesn't want it to it would still be the same dog. Stable just the same if it was prior. The dog does not know it is wrong or that it is illegal. The dog is just doing what it knows to do.
 
Discussion starter · #63 · (Edited)
Again I will make sure I visit various rescues before I adopt a pit, I likely will bring my own dog so he can interact or at least encounter his future housemate. Is this a bad idea or a good one?

As I've also stated it might be a while before I adopt a pit, maybe two or three years from now, when I transfer into the Reserves and have more time. My folks are wonderful and even my grandparents are consistent with training my own dog, the Malinois.

A bulldog also would not always mean a specific breed. It was a butchers dog or a bull baiting dog. This would be true of terriers also, different terriers were bred together early on and some bred within different regions (which is how some came to be named) within a closed gene pool which turned into types/lines/breeds.
Well I'd heard that the bull and terriers were butcher's/stock/farm dogs initially before they were used as fighting animals.

My father has often said of pitbulls that there are few other breeds where it is absolutely vital that you are the alpha, no questions to be fielded. I'd say he's correct.

That is wonderful to hear that the Vick pitbulls are largely being rehabilitated. I've seen the Dog Town special on them. Did Dogtown take all of them?

As to the HSUS anti-Pit agenda, I tend to prefer the ASPCA, or are they anti-Pit as well? That would be odd, considering my friend adopted their pit from an ASPCA shelter and that dog absolutely loves her, her husband and baby. The dog actually insists on sniffing any room that the baby is in for any hazards. I wish I had a picture, then I could show pit detractors that pits and kids can get along.

I'm guessing public opinion will turn around to save the Pitbull eventually. Owners and breeders just have to be cognizant and always on the alert. This thread I posted in the General Discussion session of a Star Trek forum I visited seems a tad promising. A majority of those polled in the attached poll don't blame the breed but say that their opinion is of individual dogs and owners.
 
Dad meant you had to be a leader, no questions asked, with that variety of canid.
oh I was just commenting on something I read in that trekkie thread..someone siad you have to be the "alpha male" specifically "male" to own a pit.

last time I checked I was a girl. :p I would hope that would still be the case...though oth I hope not if that means I have to go trade in my pit bull for a bichon..:eek:

some of the stuff I read on that thread was wacky..some conjecture..and some was pretty on point..
 
Discussion starter · #67 · (Edited)
Yeah, I was quoting more the original conversation with my father when I wrote that post. He said alpha male, and in that context he was talking to me, his son. Most of the onpoint stuff by Dingo was mine (Dingo being my label on that forum).

And I never intended to say females couldn't be pitbull owners. As stated a good friend of mine (female) owns a pit. And she is definitely the alpha of the two of them.

I had no intent to be mysogynistic with that post at all.
 
its cool...I thought it was funny...I looked at Bolo and said "well, I guess you're a bichon now. That's great! Now we don't have to worry about BSL anymore! but im not entirely sure where im gonna put the little pink bows..." and at that moment she turned her butt at me and cut a big fart. I fell out of my chair laughing.


as for "alpha"...that's wolf terminology...in wolf terms the alpha is the senior breeding wolf and nothing more. its a zoological term that isn't really applicable to dogs...since most don't breed.

though I understand what you mean by it. I consider my dog my partner and she plays an active role in decision making however thats ...like I said...a whole 'nother thread.

as for the Vick dogs, Dogtown got most of them... www.badrap.org got a few... Jessup had her hands on at least one of them for a bit too.

ASPCA...honestly id look for a good breed specific rescue...they're usually better equipped...though the screening process is a little more vigorous.

as for bringing your own dog, that's up to the individual rescue org. Most will actually require a neutral meeting...the reputable rescues anyway. Be prepared to be grilled with a ton of questions...they don't want to give these dogs to just any old person..

Bulldogs *were* stockdogs. the nature of the work a *butcher's dog* did was to basically herd bulls. Pits have been a lot of things to different people...heck Helen Keller had a pit.

and public opinion won't change for the better unless people stop being jerkwads and mistreating their dogs..
 
Discussion starter · #69 · (Edited)
I probably will go for a breed specific rescue and check for dogs that are of a mellow, non-domineering temperment. Also if the rescue allows I'd like to introduce my dog to his future housemate on neutral ground so I facilitate the dogs beginning to build the rapport neccesary for good housemates. What are good signs for first meetings?

I've seen plenty of wonderful pits, including the one owned by my friend.

as for "alpha"...that's wolf terminology...in wolf terms the alpha is the senior breeding wolf and nothing more. its a zoological term that isn't really applicable to dogs...since most don't breed.
I've seen the term alpha being used in various dog publications to describe pack leadership, especially in feral dog packs. And frequently I've seen wolf terminology at times applied in dog publications since they say all dogs are descended from the wolf. Some more than others, obviously.

I've also had sources inform me pitbulls were also all around farm dogs of the American West, brought to North America by English immigrants where they were crossbred to be on the larger, heavier side to be the all purpose work dogs of the American farm where they served as guardians, livestock dogs, and anything else farmers dreamt up for them.
 
I probably will go for a breed specific rescue and check for dogs that are of a mellow, non-domineering temperment. Also if the rescue allows I'd like to introduce my dog to his future housemate on neutral ground so I facilitate the dogs beginning to build the rapport neccesary for good housemates. What are good signs for first meetings?
play. non aggressive play behaviors. which are play bows, loosely wagging tails, trading off the aggressor/chasee roles.

I've seen the term alpha being used in various dog publications to describe pack leadership, especially in feral dog packs. And frequently I've seen wolf terminology at times applied in dog publications since they say all dogs are descended from the wolf. Some more than others, obviously.
not obviously.

this is the guy that thought up the word "alpha" and HE says it's wrong.
http://www.davemech.org/news.html

and wolf behavior is vastly different than that of dogs. it doesn't really become apparent until you meet one but..wolves are WILD. Dogs are NOT. that make a HUGE difference. they may be related but they are NOT the same animal. and yes I've been around wolves in face to face kind of scenarios.

as for ferals, they form loose packs with little to no structure.

leader is a more accurate term for what you are trying to describe.


But that's waaay off topic lol.

I've also had sources inform me pitbulls were also all around farm dogs of the American West, brought to North America by English immigrants where they were crossbred to be on the larger, heavier side to be the all purpose work dogs of the American farm where they served as guardians, livestock dogs, and anything else farmers dreamt up for them.

some were some weren't. the attitude back then was kind of "its a dog. it pulls its weight in the work or doesn't do crap cuz its dead" some of that is absolutely true and confirmed by historical photos and depictions...other aren't .
 
Again I will make sure I visit various rescues before I adopt a pit, I likely will bring my own dog so he can interact or at least encounter his future housemate. Is this a bad idea or a good one?
I don't see why it wouldn't be a good idea. You want to see how they react and interact.

Well I'd heard that the bull and terriers were butcher's/stock/farm dogs initially before they were used as fighting animals.
Bulldogs were butchers dogs and baiting dogs. The bull and terrier dogs were more so fighting dogs (dog against dog). Though they had many other uses because of various owners.

My father has often said of pitbulls that there are few other breeds where it is absolutely vital that you are the alpha, no questions to be fielded. I'd say he's correct.
I could not agree with him as being correct. There are plenty of other breeds where that is very vital, when compared more so then a Pit. Certain aspects of them call for a handler who does know what they are doing but their high willingness to please and more "submissive" to humans nature doesn't make them all that hard. I always hear the same things though. Pit Bulls are dominant, stubborn, hard to train, need an alpha, ect. People make them out to have this special need more so then other breeds. Pits and Boxers are probably the easiest I've ever had. Especially since getting into the other breeds. Big difference there, I've had to adjust my training technique, learn patience, be very consistent on somethings, the list goes on. I really love other breeds for what they are but why can't they all be so easy as the Pits?

That is wonderful to hear that the Vick pitbulls are largely being rehabilitated. I've seen the Dog Town special on them. Did Dogtown take all of them?
No only the ones that needed to be rehabbed/special treatment. The others went into rescue/foster homes where they were then adopted.

As to the HSUS anti-Pit agenda, I tend to prefer the ASPCA, or are they anti-Pit as well? That would be odd, considering my friend adopted their pit from an ASPCA shelter and that dog absolutely loves her, her husband and baby. The dog actually insists on sniffing any room that the baby is in for any hazards. I wish I had a picture, then I could show pit detractors that pits and kids can get along.
To my knowledge ASPCA is not anti Pit and they are good all around for animals. Well ASPCA actually runs shelters too, unlike the HSUS therefore they do not adopt out any dogs of any breed. ASPCA is for animals much different then HSUS or PETA who want domestic animals done.

I'm guessing public opinion will turn around to save the Pitbull eventually. Owners and breeders just have to be cognizant and always on the alert. This thread I posted in the General Discussion session of a Star Trek forum I visited seems a tad promising. A majority of those polled in the attached poll don't blame the breed but say that their opinion is of individual dogs and owners.
Yeah I hope so.

I've also had sources inform me pitbulls were also all around farm dogs of the American West, brought to North America by English immigrants where they were crossbred to be on the larger, heavier side to be the all purpose work dogs of the American farm where they served as guardians, livestock dogs, and anything else farmers dreamt up for them.
I've never seen any evidence to support this. I'm not really seeing these dogs in my dogs pedigrees to my knowledge nor is their really any explanation of what "Bred up in size" means because they are not big dogs so how small were they supposedly?. So to what size and with what breed/breeds. They still looked the same as their imported ancestors in physical build and size.
I have seen historical photos including that of my family and others with Pits. From railroaders, to business owners, to random families, ect. Different people did utilize them for different purposes so certainly some as farm dogs or for other purposes.

That history sounds much like the American Bulldog history. A larger breed of dog often used as catch, stock and guard dogs.
 
Dad meant you had to be a leader, no questions asked, with that variety of canid. Alpha doesn't always mean male. A herd matriarch of a hyena pride is an 'alpha female'.

....but Hyenas are not dogs or of the Canid Genus. They are more closely related to cats and are part of the Meerkat family.
 
Discussion starter · #73 · (Edited)
Originally Posted by LoneRider
Dad meant you had to be a leader, no questions asked, with that variety of canid. Alpha doesn't always mean male. A herd matriarch of a hyena pride is an 'alpha female'.


....but Hyenas are not dogs or of the Canid Genus. They are more closely related to cats and are part of the Meerkat family.
I know that. I meant that the term alpha is not limited to the male gender in the context of animal hierarchies.

That history sounds much like the American Bulldog history. A larger breed of dog often used as catch, stock and guard dogs.
Don't Pitbulls draw at least part of their ancestry from the American Bulldog as well? I recall that same account where my information came from said that English settlers bred their bull and terrier crosses with larger American dogs for the all purpose farm dog that the pitbull became.

I've also heard the term bullenbeiser, which seems to be some type of stock dog as well. What's a bullenbeiser?

Pits and Boxers are probably the easiest I've ever had. Especially since getting into the other breeds.
Really? Easier than my Malinois? I guess we figured they've got that same spirited nature of almost any terrier, that's why the alpha comment.

I guess I've been misinformed about the pitbull's nature all these years. That's why I'm doing my research, to see what it is exactly I'm dealing with.

I find this breed, a former symbol of the American spirit that is now badly maligned thanks to a few media (insert expletive here)-ers, to be quite fascinating thus far.

play. non aggressive play behaviors. which are play bows, loosely wagging tails, trading off the aggressor/chasee roles.
OK. So meeting on neutral ground would be best, perhaps a park or an open field somewhere?

On another note, I've seen that in Brazil pitbulls aren't as badly maligned as they are here in the US. Mostly Brazilian Jiu Jitsu practicioners and MMA fighters tend to own them and take care of their dogs. In fact one of the Gracie family, Renzo Gracie, has a Mixed Martial Arts team called the New York Pitbulls in dedication to the great heart and toughness that the pitbull has. I'd call that a step in a good direction for public opinion on the pit.

Another piece of trivia. Did you know that the spetsnaz, Russia's special forces, are also known as Russia's Pitbulls? This has been attributed to the extreme toughness of the typical spetsnaz soldier.
 
Don't Pitbulls draw at least part of their ancestry from the American Bulldog as well? I recall that same account where my information came from said that English settlers bred their bull and terrier crosses with larger American dogs for the all purpose farm dog that the pitbull became.
No they came here from places such as England and Ireland. Which would mean while there is bulldog no American Bulldog. American Bulldog would not have been across the pond.

Pit Bulls did not become all purpose farm dogs. (Although again some would call ABs such) They were brought here as pit dogs and continued to be pit dogs. Some did come just as family dogs, some were sold just as pet/family dogs. Even dogs within our dogs pedigrees might have been a dog that a dogman sold as a pet and got back later or bred to later. So some made it for other uses and as pets, like those in the photos railroaders, farmers, hunters, ect having them. But they did not change and become something else. It is no different then any other breed being owned for something other then their purpose.

I realize this is something you've heard and not your own idea. But I say the same as I did in the last post, I've never seen evidence which suggest that they were bred with American Bulldogs. If this is true then I'd like to see some proof. Or at least evidence backing the theory. I'm not asking you, but to whoever thinks of these and other theories they seem to pull on a whim.

Their appearance from those imported on down the line did not change much. People say cross for added size, but they were never a tiny dog breed. These were not originally 10-25lbs dogs. Most any bulldog is at least a medium sized breed. While they are said to be crossed with terrier, which are typically small (though not all are/were), they are not all 100% terrier.

Then there is the important issue of pedigrees. If this breed really came to be by the infusion of American Bulldog then I don't see a reason why they would not show this. Because back then there would be no reason to hide any sort of crossing and paper hanging would not take place.

Some lines of American Bulldog have Pit blood bred into them. Once more it sounds like the history you are describing is that of the American Bulldog. Not the APBT nor Pit/AB crosses. The bulldogs (of england) brought here came to be known as the American Bulldog. They were not crossed with Pit Bull. The AB however is likely most similar to the bulldogs that were used to create pit bulls.

You are looking at already loosely established "breeds" that were brought here and became known as american by breed name.

In recent time some Pits do have American Bulldog but that is much different then AB as foundation of the breed. That is breeders not keeping the breed honest. So while I might see a 95lbs Pit Bull weight pulling who has American Bulldog in his 4th generation most my dog nor most the rest of the APBTs out there share his blood. No different then if a breeder mixes their golden with a lab and still calls it a lab.

All these theories of pit bulls were created by crossing to american bulldog, bullmastiff, pointer, setter, coonhound or greyhound obviously can not all be true because of the very fact they'd contradict each other.

I've also heard the term bullenbeiser, which seems to be some type of stock dog as well. What's a bullenbeiser?
Bullenbeisser was a bulldog. It is said to be ancestor of the Boxer and if you look at original Boxers they looked closely to what the Bullenbeisser did. These were bulldogs of germany, hence the name. This breed came from molossers as Zim mentioned the Boxer is a molosser.

Really? Easier than my Malinois? I guess we figured they've got that same spirited nature of almost any terrier, that's why the alpha comment.

I guess I've been misinformed about the pitbull's nature all these years. That's why I'm doing my research, to see what it is exactly I'm dealing with.

I find this breed, a former symbol of the American spirit that is now badly maligned thanks to a few media (insert expletive here)-ers, to be quite fascinating thus far.
I don't know about your Malinois. I only know about mine and others I've had experience with. In certain ways easier but neither is perfect. Some Malinois are also not as drivey as others, maybe some don't even require the same amount, which is a lot of socialization (though I doubt that but I'm not going to guess about your dog). I really wasn't speaking of my Malinois or any other Malinois more so of the mastiffs and primitive molosser breeds (mainly those used for flock guardian/property guards/dog fighting). Dealing with these dogs is a different playing field. The dogs do not bend at my every wish. They can challenge, they can think what they are doing is best. Raising my voice means nothing. Getting upset which I've learned not to do -patience- gives me a brick wall. With other breeds I don't have these problems, Pit Bulls included. I can think of breeds that require more in certain aspects of ownership as well as being always the leader and very consistent.

They do have some of the terrier temperament traits. But they are not "too terrier" I feel most have a good enough balance in temperament, drives, ect. There are harder to handle terrier breeds out there. Some are too smart for your own good, a little stubborn and very, very driven.

OK. So meeting on neutral ground would be best, perhaps a park or an open field somewhere?
That is probably a good idea if you can manage.

On another note, I've seen that in Brazil pitbulls aren't as badly maligned as they are here in the US. Mostly Brazilian Jiu Jitsu practicioners and MMA fighters tend to own them and take care of their dogs. In fact one of the Gracie family, Renzo Gracie, has a Mixed Martial Arts team called the New York Pitbulls in dedication to the great heart and toughness that the pitbull has. I'd call that a step in a good direction for public opinion on the pit.
Pit fighting is common enough in Brazil without much of the negative implications of fighting dogs. The dangers and such, so I can see why people there do not freak as much as people around here. It is about what has been planted in their head. Media is a powerful tool that can do great damage rather quickly. I've plenty pics/peds on Pits of Brazil.

Another piece of trivia. Did you know that the spetsnaz, Russia's special forces, are also known as Russia's Pitbulls? This has been attributed to the extreme toughness of the typical spetsnaz soldier.
Not something I knew.
 
I know that. I meant that the term alpha is not limited to the male gender in the context of animal hierarchies. .
in social species the hierarchies vary extremely and "alpha" means different things to different animals(lol...im a biology major in college...i study this stuff. ;) )


Really? Easier than my Malinois? I guess we figured they've got that same spirited nature of almost any terrier, that's why the alpha comment.

I guess I've been misinformed about the pitbull's nature all these years. That's why I'm doing my research, to see what it is exactly I'm dealing with.

I find this breed, a former symbol of the American spirit that is now badly maligned thanks to a few media (insert expletive here)-ers, to be quite fascinating thus far.
Yeah the media hasnt been too helpful...but its really idiots who get dogs and dont think to learn wtf they are doing before they get them...they have all these things that they have heard about pits and about dogs in general and they dont think to make sure if any of it is true or not until they actually have the dog and are experiencing serious issues..and often by then its too late and the animal is in quarantine with AC....thats the biggest issue imo and the rest of it stems from that.

a Mal is the same in some respects to a pit and other respects very very different. of course all this varies somewhat from individual dog to individual dog but a pit is meant to be a balanced animal..balanced in form and in temperment. they are very versatile in that respect. some can be little hellions though...my dog is a perfect example of pit bull hellionness lol..



OK. So meeting on neutral ground would be best, perhaps a park or an open field somewhere?.
that would be the best and most rescues will not only allow this, they encourage it.

On another note, I've seen that in Brazil pitbulls aren't as badly maligned as they are here in the US. Mostly Brazilian Jiu Jitsu practicioners and MMA fighters tend to own them and take care of their dogs. In fact one of the Gracie family, Renzo Gracie, has a Mixed Martial Arts team called the New York Pitbulls in dedication to the great heart and toughness that the pitbull has. I'd call that a step in a good direction for public opinion on the pit.

on that note...spicy have you heard anything more about the south american pit bull games thing?
 
on that note...spicy have you heard anything more about the south american pit bull games thing?
Haven't heard anything really since the invitation to their nationals in Peru. I don't think we will be going, I think it is just too expensive. I checked out plane tickets and I was like gee this isn't bad, then I checked for later in the year and they were very expensive. I guess because it would be winter here is the only thing I could think. Our club decided on some similar events so its all fun here.
 
Discussion starter · #77 ·
I realize this is something you've heard and not your own idea. But I say the same as I did in the last post, I've never seen evidence which suggest that they were bred with American Bulldogs. If this is true then I'd like to see some proof. Or at least evidence backing the theory. I'm not asking you, but to whoever thinks of these and other theories they seem to pull on a whim.
I got that one from the Pitbulls for Dummies book.

The comment about the Mixed Martial Arts team calling themselves the Pitbulls is out of admiration of the dogs' strength and gameness as well as the great heart that Pits put into anything they do.

It's an interesting thing to note that many mixed martial artists, such as Sean Sherk and Renzo Gracie have a fondness for the Pitbull. Yes it's probably due to the tough guy image such dogs have inherent to them due to a violent past, but they are known to take good care and love their own dogs.

So some made it for other uses and as pets, like those in the photos railroaders, farmers, hunters, ect having them. But they did not change and become something else. It is no different then any other breed being owned for something other then their purpose.
Thanks for the insight.

Interestingly enough I recall tales of Victorian gentlemen owning their fighting dogs as family pets with nary an issue. No, I don't condone dog fighting, but I often use this example to show that pits are not by nature human aggressive.

A fairly disturbing pitbull related quote I heard while watching DVD of the HBO Miniseries Generation Kill, which follows the US Marine Corps 1st Reconaissance Battalion during the 2003 invasion: "The Marine Corps is like America's little pitbull. Beat it. Starve it. Then every once in a while let it loose to attack someone." -Attributed to Corporal Ray Person, USMC, 1st Recon Battalion.

That was an oh not so subtle hint that public opinion on pitbulls still has a way to go.

On another note, I suppose it's fair to say that the molosser is basically the ancestor of the modern mastiff, boxer, and pitbull?

And the American Staffordshire Terrier is a cousin of the Pitbull, but a separate breed as I understand. From what I gather, the AST was an attempt to get Pits recognized by the AKC but the AKC would not accept them so the AST was bred to distance the breed from the dog fighting past. Or is my information inaccurate?
 
I Interestingly enough I recall tales of Victorian gentlemen owning their fighting dogs as family pets with nary an issue. No, I don't condone dog fighting, but I often use this example to show that pits are not by nature human aggressive.
Yes quite true.

On another note, I suppose it's fair to say that the molosser is basically the ancestor of the modern mastiff, boxer, and pitbull?
All in all their is more then one molosser breed but yes. Because the mastiffs descended from this, then the bulldogs of which went into the Boxer and the Pit Bull.

And the American Staffordshire Terrier is a cousin of the Pitbull, but a separate breed as I understand. From what I gather, the AST was an attempt to get Pits recognized by the AKC but the AKC would not accept them so the AST was bred to distance the breed from the dog fighting past. Or is my information inaccurate?
The AmStaff is an APBT with a different name under the AKC. It is called APBT under the UKC. Either are Pit Bulls. Pit bull can apply to more then one breed.

In 1935 AKC did accept Pits to be registered under the name of Staffordshire Terrier. I mentioned Petey earlier, he was one of the dogs registered with the AKC. Actually several of Black Jack's progeny along with various other well known game bred dogs are seen in the pedigrees of the foundation or heavy influential AmStaffs. You'll see lots of dual registered dogs at that time. 1935 was not the end of it as stud books were allowed to open by AKC so still decades later more APBTs were dual registered with AKC as AmStaff (which by then the name had been changed to American Staffordshire Terrier). So they can only be but the same breed by genetics. The AmStaff wasn't out crossed to other breeds. Yet they were bred in a different direction for the most part and the standard is slightly different. I find though that they really look a lot like their ancestors, some of their ancestors anyway. The standard preserved certain proportions of specific dogs of the past. You can get a big variation in type within a breed but it doesn't make them different breeds* all in all. Think of barbie collies and working border collies. There can be a noticeable difference in conformation and temperament with these dogs. We see it often in working breeds.

*In some cases even without out crosses a strain of dogs can become so unrecognizable or so far away from the original dogs that it should be classes as a different breed. Breeding for different values could lead to this but it is really up to the people to split them off into different breeds even though they might not have out crosses. They could leave them as certain types or lines within a breed that excel at a specific task or they can split them. In some cases they also do this by color, they are separated as different breeds even though they are in fact still the same.

Look at the Alapaha Blue Blood Bulldog, I myself would not recognize this as its own breed. More so a bloodline within the American Bulldog breed. Seems to be how they came to be. Simply one families line of dogs. They go back as a line longer then many AB lines, but that is no different then in certain other breeds. Like the Colby line of APBTs. If you have a family who will breed for generations then they will keep the dogs going for generations. For many they either did not have this going for them when some of the early dogs were here, their own children/grand children who would keep the line going or the breeders who do have longer lines were not around back then so the line is shorter. ABBBs did have that going for them, but why should they not be a bloodline of AB rather then a separate breed. They came from ABs, the bulldogs brought here from across the pond, and they were bred for the same function by the line/breeds founder. AmStaff are bred within a close registry now so they are their own strain but not different enough yet to be an entirely different breed. If they AKC had also used the name APBT then their wouldn't be so much debate about it. It'd be settled simply that most the time they have been bred in different directions is all. Like we see in many other breeds.

As I mentioned ABs, one could consider scott type and johnson type different breeds. They could take the extremes of those and chose to split them and have them registered as seperate breed, but that is not the case. They are still considered the same breed and often bred together or dogs of both lines are being bred in varying percentages of scott or johnson blood in the pedigree.
 
Discussion starter · #79 · (Edited)
I'm not quite so familiar with a Scott Type or Johnson Type APBT breed. But I never quite looked into lineage as I'm more interested in adopting a rescue pit.

I briefly contemplated getting a puppy because again some sources say one should start with a puppy to make sure the dog is more loyal to you and its thus more trainable. I don't quite agree with that brand of wisdom, frankly. If I do adopt a pit in the next few years it'll be a rescue that gets along well with my Malinois.

I've heard both that pits are very easy to train and that they're very difficult to train. I would imagine the former would be more true, because you'd want a controllable dog, especially one with that amount of physical strength. This is again logic based thinking. Strong dog = desire for controllability. An uncontrollable dog with that amount of brute power could really ruin the day of his handler.

I'm sure volunteering at a Pit rescue at my next duty station where I'll probably have extended time in garrison would be helpful for increasing my knowledge of the breed.

I've heard the term Pitbull can refer to the American Pitbull Terrier and American Staffordshire Terriers predominantly, but in legal terms can refer to such diverse breeds as the Boerbel, Dogo Argentino and Cane Corso among others. (This I know because a buddy of mine had to find housing off post at FT Riley because he had a Cane Corso and it was deemed a 'pitbull' by housing authority.) Thankfully my friend had enough money to get his own place out off post and was planning to do so anyway, but the post's BSL hastened his decision.
 
I'm not quite so familiar with a Scott Type or Johnson Type APBT breed. But I never quite looked into lineage as I'm more interested in adopting a rescue pit.

I briefly contemplated getting a puppy because again some sources say one should start with a puppy to make sure the dog is more loyal to you and its thus more trainable. I don't quite agree with that brand of wisdom, frankly. If I do adopt a pit in the next few years it'll be a rescue that gets along well with my Malinois.

I've heard both that pits are very easy to train and that they're very difficult to train. I would imagine the former would be more true, because you'd want a controllable dog, especially one with that amount of physical strength. This is again logic based thinking. Strong dog = desire for controllability. An uncontrollable dog with that amount of brute power could really ruin the day of his handler.

I'm sure volunteering at a Pit rescue at my next duty station where I'll probably have extended time in garrison would be helpful for increasing my knowledge of the breed.

I've heard the term Pitbull can refer to the American Pitbull Terrier and American Staffordshire Terriers predominantly, but in legal terms can refer to such diverse breeds as the Boerbel, Dogo Argentino and Cane Corso among others. (This I know because a buddy of mine had to find housing off post at FT Riley because he had a Cane Corso and it was deemed a 'pitbull' by housing authority.) Thankfully my friend had enough money to get his own place out off post and was planning to do so anyway, but the post's BSL hastened his decision.
Scott and Johnson are American bulldog strains :)

I have found out of all 3 of my dogs my APBT has been the easiest to train..she is always eager to do what every (as long as food is evolved ;))....her being strong only means she must be trained...its easy to ignore when a little 16lb dog is pulling at the leash or jumps up on you at the door....its another thing to have a 50lb dog do it :p

You will find there are a few "camps" on what makes a Pit bull....some will say the only "Pit bull" is the American Pit Bull Terrier because its the only one with Pit in the name.....some say Pit bull is a lose term to describe a multitude of "bully breeds"....APBT/AST/SBT/EBT etc....
 
61 - 80 of 91 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top