Why are Pit Bull owners and apologists so defensive? I recently came across an article and study that endeavors to answer that question.
“Pit Bull” and “Apologist” were once terms that carried no pejorative connotations, but as their definitions have blurred their usage has shifted decidedly towards the negative. Pit Bulls are now the most maligned and problematic dog breed due to their popularity as a thug accessory, their use in dog fighting, their implication in human attacks, their ubiquity in shelters, and the resulting reputation which is highlighted in the media. Apologetics was once the art of defending an earnestly held position against criticism, but now it’s increasingly associated with public-relations hacks who defend the indefensible. For purposes of this post, let’s roll back our understanding of these two terms to a neutral state.
There’s no shortage of Pit Bull advocacy blogs and websites with content that could justly be called pit bull apologia. And yet, almost all of these authors are coming from a unique segment of the pit bull owning population, namely the rescue community who neither breeds nor fights pit bulls. This is a culture unto itself that in many ways is fighting against or cleaning up the mess left by other communities within the greater pit bull culture.
On the one hand, some people might be drawn to this breed in the hope of exploiting and perpetuating its vicious reputation. Such owners seek to use these dogs as status symbols of power and aggression and to reap the secondary benefit of an intimidating persona.
On the other hand, some people might see qualities in this breed that run contrary to its negative image and want to establish “traditional” human-dog relationships with their pit bulls. Nevertheless, they “inherit,” and presumably have to contend with, adverse public perceptions of their pets.
Sociologically, this adverse perception can be considered a breed stigma where the animal itself has a “spoiled” or tainted identity and where owners may experience a courtesy stigma as a consequence of their association with, and ownership of, pit bulls.
…
In the face of social disapproval or even fear, stigmatized individuals seek to manage or respond to these adverse perceptions by relying on interpersonal strategies that minimize, neutralize, or evade their stigma.
If their dogs are status symbols, they are not valued as a totem of ferocity or power or violence, rather they are emblematic of more idealistic concerns: rescue, rehabilitation, redemption, second chances, countering stereotypes, and animal philanthropy.
That doesn’t mean there’s no room for criticism here; although well-intentioned, such idealism can still suffer from the less desirable motives associated with “slumming,” “poverty pimping,” and misguided do-goodery. Sometimes this group’s lack of real engagement opportunities with the thug culture, dog fighting culture, or the complex of breeding > selling/giving > dumping adolescent pit bulls in shelter “culture” makes them turn on their peers closer to home. Some of the most vehement attacks against suburban and rural hobby breeding and pure bred dog culture comes from the ardent white-knights in pit bull rescue who are looking for people to blame and smite.
I’ve often found myself at odds with the greater messages coming out of the pit bull apologist community; some of their arguments just don’t hold water in my view [and I’ll cover these in a later post] and some of their campaigns are less about the true problems in the greater pit bull world and more about attacking and jeopardizing purebred dog ownership and breeding. In trying to reconcile this community’s desire to help pit bulls but also analyze their shortcomings, I stumbled across a study that hasn’t gotten much traction on the pit bull apologist blogs. Despite almost universal coverage of published data like the Clifton Report (negative against pit bulls) and the American Temperament Test Society findings (generally positive data for pit bulls), one published survey has apparently no record of discussion among the most prominent pit bull advocates despite its contents being highly relevant to the authors themselves.
In 2000, the Tufts Center for Animal Advocacy published the results of an ethnographic survey of 28 pit bull owners titled: Managing the Stigma of Outlaw Breeds: A Case Study of Pit Bull Owners.
ABSTRACT
Ethnographic interviews were conducted with 28 pit bull “owners” to explore the sociological experience of having a dog with a negative image. Results indicate that the vast majority of respondents felt that these dogs were stigmatized because of their breed. Respondents made this conclusion because friends, family, and strangers were apprehensive in the presence of their dogs and because they made accusations about the breed’s viciousness and lack of predictability.In the face of this stigma, respondents resorted to using a variety of interactional strategies to lessen the impact of this perception or prevent it from occurring. These strategies included passing their dogs as breeds other than pit bulls, denying that their behavior is biologically determined, debunking adverse media coverage, using humor, emphasizing counter-stereotypical behavior, avoiding stereotypical equipment or accessories, taking preventive measures, or becoming breed ambassadors.
Pit Bulls aren’t Pit Bulls
This argument is quite popular and comes in many forms. Some apologists claim that since there is no single breed called “pit bull” that such designations are meaningless. Others will point out that there are too many breeds that can be confused with a pit bull or which belong to a class or landrace of bully breeds, some even cite the inability of genetic or picture tests to label these dogs correctly. Other manifestations of this same tactic are the “St. Francis Terrier,” “he’s a boxer-mix,” and other means to not use the term pit bull.
Confusion surrounding the multiple names used to refer to pit bulls, as well as the inconsistency with which they were accurately identified, offered respondents an opportunity to present their dogs in a better light simply by the way in which they referred to their breed. Many owners attempted to manage breed stigma by studiously avoiding the term pit bull and replacing it with a more neutral and respectable name such as American Staffordshire Terrier. By using this term, respondents passed their pit bull as a more idealized version of the breed.
…Other respondents chose to distance their pit bulls even further from the breed’s intimidating public persona by emphasizing their unknown or mixed heritage as shelter dogs. The notion of passing functioned more directly in this context insofar as owners avoided all references to the breed. Several owners referred to their dogs as a “mixed breed,” a “mutt,” or a “pound dog.” One respondent found that people often identi?ed her dog incorrectly and she chose not to correct their misconception.
Behavior is Not Biological
The extreme presentation of this tactic is the argument that Pit Bulls are a blank slate and that it is entirely nurture, and no nature which governs the negative outcomes in the breed. Less extreme interpretations still place blame squarely on the “owners” or “trainers” or thugs who create bad outcomes through intentional abuse and aggression training or simply through neglect.
A second strategy for neutralizing breed stigma was for respondents to prevent their own pit bulls, as well as the breed itself, from being blamed for bad behavior. This was accomplished in several ways: they emphasized the role of environment and training as determinants of behavior; they pointed out similarities between pit bull behavior and that found in other breeds; they noted that these dogs were unaware of their own strength; and they insisted that their dogs were unlike other, more stereotypical pit bulls.
…
These comments conveyed the belief that behavior does not occur in a vacuum; rather, pit bulls, like any other animal (including humans), are shaped by, and react to, their environment.Training was also emphasized, particularly in terms of its contribution to aggressive behavior. One respondent remarked, “I think almost any breed can be trained to be bad-aggressive.” Another respondent, describing a group of pit bull owners he had seen in a nearby city, said, “They wanted a pit bull, they wanted this little, vicious dog that just barks at people. You know, they foster that and they want that. I think that’s why the dog ends up being that way.”
…
The assertion that pit bulls’ behavior is determined largely by their owners and their environment plays an important role in defusing breed stigma because these dogs are often perceived as naturally vicious. Although respondents acknowledged the unusual strength of these dogs, they denied any malicious intent on their part and maintained that owners could choose to channel these physical capabilities in positive or negative directions. The few respondents who witnessed aggressive and unwanted behavior in their dogs targeted inbreeding as the problem; dogs “born bad” were considered anomalies that had resulted from poor breeding, either accidental or deliberate.
Adverse Media Coverage
Apologists often claim that the media coverage of the breed is sensationalist and biased, mostly surrounding reports of bites, maulings, and deaths. Although popular, these sorts of arguments aren’t really effective because they are essentially saying “it’s not as bad as you think” versus an affirmative “it’s not bad, this doesn’t happen.”
As a group, respondents had a complicated and somewhat ambivalent reaction to pit bull-related media coverage, and many of them took an active role in debunking press coverage and media reports. This approach to managing breed stigma included four general criticisms: selective reporting, sensationalism, a lack of objectivity, and a failure to provide context.
…
These respondents complained that journalists were more interested in reporting dog attacks and bites if they involved pit bulls. There was also frequent cynicism about articles and television reports that focused on the lurid details of pit bull attacks. One woman quipped, “What do they say? ‘If it bleeds, it leads.’” When asked about the breed of dog that was mentioned in a particular newspaper article, another owner said, “I think it was a pit bull; that’s what the paper said. Of course, because that’s what sells.” Owners argued that media coverage was fueled by a desire to sell papers or to attract television viewers and that reporters were simply giving people what they wanted to hear.
Countering Stereotypes with Humor
There’s nothing wrong with a little humor and given just how overwrought the image of vicious pitbulls is and even the melodramatic handling of dog fighting and shelter deaths, there’s not much you can object to about people bringing a little levity to the situation to remind us that these are dogs and not monsters.
Many respondents noticed a sharp discrepancy between the demeanor of their own pit bulls and the reputation of the breed as a whole; this contrast occasionally prompted jokes and humor. Although such a response did not involve an active rebuttal of the breed’s reputation, it allowed owners to reafrm their own perception of pit bulls. Like any breed of dog, pit bulls have many dimensions to their personalities, and the occasions for this humor allowed respondents the opportunity to refute the one-sidedness of breed stereotypes.
This humor often revolved around contrast and contradiction; although the popular image of pit bulls points to vicious, aggressive dogs, many owners had encountered the opposite behavior. For example, humor often resulted from the observation of a dog’s affability and playfulness in light of the expectation that pit bulls are tough, intimidating dogs.
Preventative Measures
Another rather solid strategy in the defense of pit bulls is simply being a good dog owner and responsible citizen and making sure your dog is prepared to be one as well. Again, not much to criticize or question when the strategy is doing right by the breed when so many others are doing wrong.
A seventh strategy used by some respondents entailed managing breed stigma by modifying their dogs’ behaviors or physical capabilities. By training their pit bulls to avoid questionable behavior, however innocent, many respondents sought to anticipate and defuse people’s concern. These preventive measures offered owners an effective method for ensuring that people did not misinterpret their pit bulls’ behavior, given the vicious reputation attributed to these dogs.
Although studies of pit bull anatomy have found no evidence of a “locking jaw,” this breed does have a very strong jaw and can grip with considerable tenacity. Several respondents had a policy of not playing tug-of-war with their dogs because they did not want to develop this jaw strength.
Breed Ambassadors
This is by far the most potent strategy to effect a change in the perception and stigma of pit bulls. Instead of just talking about problems and complaining about bias and what other people do, to become an existential role model and demonstrate that there is another pit bull ownership paradigm that doesn’t include violence or abuse or neglect or fences or sequestration or even “take my word for it.” It’s not enough to say the breed has a bad reputation if you’re not providing a good reputation to take its place. It’s not enough to say “stop valuing this breed based on their performance in a pit” if you’re not showing the world that we can value them for their performance on the competition fields or in the hospitals or at the dog park.
One of the most public and visible ways in which respondents managed breed stigma was to become an advocate or ambassador for pit bulls. These owners dened their responsibility in terms of the breed as a whole, and they sought to present these dogs – often through the example of their own pit bulls – as friendly, well behaved pets. This approach involved rebutting stereotypes and misconceptions as well as promoting the breed’s winning qualities. Owners often encouraged their pit bulls to act as their own ambassadors by showcasing the dogs’ friendly, outgoing personalities. In addition, some respondents filled the role of advocate/ambassador by serving as models of responsible dog ownership.
…Preventive measures they undertook included a variety of approaches such as refusing to play particular games, discouraging “mouthiness,” training their dogs not to jump up on people, and implementing certain protocols around children.
In general I find the tactics to assuage pit bull negativity to be dead-ends and ineffective strategies to promote and defend the breed. Claiming that an individual dog is not a pit bull or obfuscating the issue by appealing to ignorance that one can never know what a pit bull even is or that there are just too many look-alike breeds will never convince anyone that pit bulls are not monsters because to deny an identity is to give up the ability to shape it. It’s self-defeating: you can’t advocate that pit bulls are good if you turn around and say that they don’t exist in a form that allows you to make any claims about them at all.
Denying that behavior is biological is likewise a losing strategy. We know better and to claim that dogs are a clean slate goes against everything else we know and believe about dogs and breeds and genetics. The entire paradigm of pure bred dogs is centered around the idea that characteristics and behavior have a strong genetic component and this can be selected for and preserved over generations. Even claims that breeders have been selecting against gameness and viciousness are not convincing if you insist that this has been done within a closed gene pool or within a landrace that includes other dogs bred for their bite. Otherwise we’re left with the argument that breeders have selected away from gameness and bite but have done so by magically finding dogs in the breed that despite strong selection for these traits, somehow lack them. And you also have to ignore the observation that people are still breeding these dogs for these now-negative traits. You can’t run from history nor from genetics, so this tactic is a poor one at best and a very dangerous one for sure.
Likewise complaining about media coverage doesn’t really change reality nor minds. You need something tangible to counter stereotypes or media portrayals and simply pointing out bias or selective reporting doesn’t rehabilitate pit bulls as much as it simply discredits the media. When the media reports that a pit bull attacked or killed someone, it doesn’t do much to help the breed image if all you can say in response is that this is not newsworthy or it’s being blown out of proportion. The image left in the public mind is still a negative one and the public is always going to sympathize with the victim over the dog due to their own fears and natural empathy towards other humans, especially children. Even if the media stopped reporting on pit bulls, it wouldn’t do much at all to change the extant factors on the ground of how these dogs are exploited and abandoned.
The other strategies are all very effective. Humor can cut through the drama, being a good owner is the sure way to mitigate negative experiences others might have with your dogs and the breed, and being a breed ambassador is an excellent way to maximize the positive exposure pit bulls can garner when they are allowed to flourish in roles they are normally not associated with.
* * *
Comments and disagreements are welcome, but be sure to read the Comment Policy. If this post made you think and you'd like to read more like it, consider a donation to my 4 Border Collies' Treat and Toy Fund. They'll be glad you did. You can subscribe to the feed or enter your e-mail in the field on the left to receive notice of new content. You can also like BorderWars on Facebook for more frequent musings and curiosities.
* * *
Anton
Christopher
Lawrence Dillard
Lech
Stephanie
Essere
Kudos Chris a good 360 degree approach in informative journalism.
Chris I think this is a very good essay and well thought out.
When I was in grad school at U Penn in Anatomy I was asked by Dr Lehr Brisban a Am Staff fancier to compare the jaw muscle mass of an adult male Am Staff that had been euthanized because of aggression to that of a more standard dog of similar body weight. I was able to get a body of a male German Shepherd of similar weight from the U Penn post mortum room and I did a jaw muscle mass ratio to skinned head weight comparison. The two dogs had similar jaw muscle masses. The unique thing about the Am Staff was that the skull lacked the large dorsal mid-line boney ridge called the “Saggital crest” which anchors the jaw muscles in most carnivores. This absence then produced the illusion of a greater mass of jaw muscle because the muscles dipped down to anchor on the top of the skull just lateral to the midline, thus bulging on each side with a midline gully.
There was nothing unusual in the dog’s jaw joints.
One behavior cited by people proposing that pit bulls can lock their jaws do to some physical mechanism is that you can pick some pit bulls off the ground if they are biting firmly onto a rope. What is not appreciated is that dogs, and probably other members of the Carnivora, have a reflex to clamp down on anything they are holding if it is moving or someone is trying to pull it out of their jaws.
Police dogs are trained to hold on when they grab the arm of a subject and I have seen training videos where a Terv is swung about in the air while holding onto the arm of the person in the dog bite suit.
Borzois are not a breed noted for massive jaw muscles but when we are lure coursing and an enthusiastic dog gets the bag in its jaws you cannot pry the jaws open to get the bag out. I work with my puppies to teach them not to bite fingers or hands so I can get the dog to let loose of the bag by sticking my hand near the mouth and then screaming as if the dog really did hurt me. (It has to sound like they really hurt you so I often upset people near me). I also once had a male Borzoi (Barnabas) at a consult with a dog dentist who tried to open Barnabas’ mouth and the dog would not let this stranger open his mouth. The dog dentist thought the dog had something wrong with his jaws until I did the scream as if bitten trick and the dog let me open his mouth.
I have seen a Pharaoh Hound who would also do the hang from a rope and be completely off the ground when clamped down on a toy behavior, it is not confined to the bully breeds.
Most pet dogs are pretty cooperative about letting people open their mouths so we forget that they are carnivores and the mechanism for taking and killing prey is to grab it and shake and tear at it. They have the jaw strength and neck muscle strength to do that as a heritage from their wild ancestors.
Bonnie may I have permission to copy and paste this response to a couple of friends, privately? I can leave the name out but I think they may appreciate this.
If not I can just explain the saggital crest observation and/or link to this blog.
you certainly can copy and send it on but leave a link to where it appears on the web. if I did not want my name with it I would have some clever avatar name (grin).
I should do an online version of the report I did for Dr Brisban.
Very very fair! And yes it IS wrong to deny biology.
I can see why the Tufts study is pretty much ignored. 28 owners is not even close to a statistically significant number.
As Bonnie points out, you can find a number of protection sport videos with the dogs hanging on the sleeve as they are swung off the air. I believe there WAS a bite strength study (Nat Geo with Brady Barr — http://dogfacts.wordpress.com/2008/02/03/national-geographics-dr-brady-barrs-bite-pressure-tests/ ) which compared a number of animal’s bite strength and the pit bull didn’t come out as exceptional.
Before there were Pit bulls, there were “evil devil dogs” like the Doberman, and “wolf dogs” like the GSD. The difference is that a positive portrayal of these dogs also occured (those amazing Dobermans, Rin tin tin, Bullet, etc) whereas a positive public media portrayal of the pit has yet to occur — “our gang” doesn’t count as it occured BEFORE the reputation was trashed.
One can certainly have a line of dogs that are trash — your own posts show the results of breeding for a conformation criteria that is unrealistic and temperament is just as genetically driven. One can also give a skewed public presentation of “how things are” by merely focusing on the negative and not the positive.
It’s an enthnographic survey study, not a statistical observation study! Statistically significant isn’t really the point and you can’t deny that those strategies are being employed and this study interviews owners and finds out why and how they are used. There really isn’t any statistical analysis done here, and that’s not really the point. It’s an observe and report culture vs. placing numbers on phenomenon.
Dobermans are still the “go to” bad dog, though. “Beverly Hills Chihuahua” and the animated movie “Up” each had a threatening dobe.
“Hotel for Dogs” and “Marmaduke” had a Beauceron bully, but most viewers probably saw that and thought doberman (black/tan, muscular, cropped ears). “Hotel” had a brief shot of a three-legged pit, but it was not a major character.
The Chihuahua movie starred a pit-type dog that was a good guy. There was a pit bull character in “Dog Jack” (2010), unfortunately the movie kinda sucked.
Dobermans have plenty of real-life good dogs, though. They were used extensively as military dogs in Vietnam, and dobe breeders have been serious about temperament problems, rather than just denying it. That’s what pit bulls need – less talk, more action, like Chris said.
Doberman’s make good on-screen dogs. Most people don’t realize how small pit bulls really are. The over-muscled snake-headed dogs look threatening in photos, but when they have a multi-breed cast they look rather small next to a big Lab or even bigger Bernese.
Hi Jana: The Chihuahua how much many of us do not realize how further dogs have become in the changing complex American Society? . Have you ever seen the Taco Bell dog so nasty that it has to be picked up by a rear leg because it will bite you? Well, this new Culture of Spanish Americans raise them like chicken and sell them for the same purpose. American history as immigrants settled into American life style records those cultures who eat cats and dogs. We now have a culture that not only is into Blood Sport of Pit Fighting. The Pit Bull’s history of pit fighting was first carried out in England right on the grounds of the dog shows. So the breeding for this ability is part of the genetic makeup just like hunting, or herding. I had to shake my head when a Spanish American reveled looking at my six month old puppy…”Now I do not do this but be careful of your puppy because many of my cultural back ground eat dogs under a year old”: He went on to educate, “This is why we do not eat out, because we never know what we are eating”. Oh was the reply, this is like when immigrants from China, and Korea restaurants where small dogs and cats were missing from the neighbor were traced to the kitchens of their restaurants? I understand Shelters generally put down a Pit Bull within 24 to 72 hours. Pit Bulls are many times the only dogs in a Shelter. However, are these “Dudley Do Rights” recognizing that the over population of this bred by this same culture, who would raise a huge numbers of nasty Chihuahuas for the dinner table over bred the same nasty pit bull for their Bloodsport?
…what the hell did I just read!? Holy crap.
A picture of a letter was posted onto Facebook from the Gillette Specialty Hospital, signed by Liz Jensen, apparently to someone who has a “pit bull” as a therapy dog.
The letter said that hospital does not accept “pit bull” therapy dogs.
Hard to give positive imagery when no one even lets you in. Assuming this dog is certified, clearly some organzation thought this dog passed the standards for therapy work. Individual organzations are within their right to create their own policies so long as none break federal or state or local laws to be followed. If this hospital is not in a locality where “pit bulls” are banned outright, and I bet it is not, then this is such a shame.
a therapy dog does not have the same rights as a service dog…it can not go places a service dog can
I have to agree with the hospital. Many people are afraid of pits, and to bring something people are afraid of into a recuperative setting with mentally and physically vulnerable people is counterproductive. At that point forcing it makes it seem it is more about being a pit ambassador than actually helping people (Not necessarily the person’s intention, but that is what it looks like from the outside.)
The second thing to consider is that many hospitals have published studies implicating pits in well over half of dog bite related surgeries, and they own the lion share when it comes to severe multi-body part attacks, injuries with complications, eye scalp and throat injuries, etc. Most of the dog attack patients seen by the plastic surgery dept at pediatric hospitals were injured by pits. They know what this breed is capable of, and do not want that same breed, even if it is a very nice dog, around their recovering patients (who likely have ptsd and are terrified of dogs now).
I’m sure there are plenty of other opportunities for those therapy dogs to volunteer elsewhere in the community.
No denial: Behaviour has a strong biological component. No denial: The pit bull is a problem breed. The same problems extend to all breeds where there has been selection for ‘gameness’ and ‘courage’, especially the massive breeds used for hunting wild boar, jaguars, and other big game, as well as dogs bred to attack humans in warfare or as property guardians.
But there is always a distribution in behaviour within a breed. Pitties, like Staffies, tend to be affectionate, cheerful, loyal dogs, and it should be possible to breed out the aggressive traits that cause problems.
I don’t think the Pittie and the Staffie are all that different in terms of genetic baggage. In Australia, APBT’s are banned from import and strictly restricted in most states, while Staffies are either #1 or #2 in ‘most popular breeds’ as measured by number of pedigree puppy registrations (neck and neck with Labradors for breed popularity). Yes, there many problem Staffies or Staffie X’s (and some problems with Labbies as well). But in a social environment where breeding tended to emphasize ‘family dog’ rather than ‘tough dog’, the behavioural problems receed.
I suspect the spread of behaviours is particularly broad with pit bulls because the ‘breed’ encompasses everything from dogs bred for fighting to household pet cross-breeds with unaggressive parents to street dogs. In many places where pit bulls are banned or restricted the definition of pit bull includes Staffies.
I live in a region in California with a large, generally poor, Hispanic population. Pit bull and chihuahua-type dogs are the dominant in poorer neighborhoods. Some anti-pit bull sentiment does seem to have a racist (or anti-poverty) component. If the temperament tests are done well, I think it’s good to see pit bulls ‘ambassadors’ being selected for good behaviour. Just wish there was a way to make sure the ones that get bred are the ones with sweet dispositions.
In my opinion, the Dogo Argentino and Fila Brasiliero, to name a couple breeds, are at least as problematic as the pit bull in terms of genetics of temperament. More so because they are heavier and able to do more damage. But they don’t often get singled out. I think that’s because they are relatively rare, and their owners tend to be relatively wealthy and better able to afford to keep their dogs contained, if not trained.
Australia has historically had some of the most selectively restrictive and reactionary dog import laws. One of my posts documents these laws when they were aimed at the German Shepherd Dog, called the “Alsatian” at the time in that country:
http://www.border-wars.com/2011/02/the-wolf-like-dog.html
As you can see, the root cause of that BSL was much the same as the BSL against Pit Bulls, a lot of hype and hysteria with undocumented claims of ferocity and special genetics and the worry about possible future doom if they allow those dogs to enter the country.
Australia has changed vastly since they had stupid laws about GSD’s. For example, agriculture is no longer the leading sector in the economy, the terror of dogs going feral has been brought down to earth by dealing with the realities of feral dogs, and the ‘white Australia’ policy is no more. (The realities of feral dogs are often pretty awful, though the concern about GSD’s was misplaced. In some regions, ferals, commonly dingo x large breed, cause huge losses to sheep farmers.)
The current legislative insanity, particularly in the state of Victoria, is predominantly urban and media-dominated, with a little help from AR types. It was set off by a dog attack in which a 2 yr old was killed while the dog’s owner watched. Victoria now has a total ban on pit bulls and pit bull crosses — identity determined by a stupid visual key that would pass most pit bull x mastiff types, but which takes in many Staffie X’s. See http://www.gazette.vic.gov.au/gazette/Gazettes2011/GG2011S283.pdf . This absurd legislation has been used to seize and euthanize many family dogs.
On the other hand, I can see the point of forbidding the import of the five banned breeds. If management of pit bull problems is beyond your government’s skills, you don’t need to add fila Brasiliero, dogo Argentino, Japanese Tosa and presa canario to your breed mix.
In Australia, as in the US, there are people who love fierce dogs and blood sport. For some, a variant of hunting wild pigs has become the equivalent of bull or bear bating (not saying all pig hunters are this way). Others value aggression to humans. Others like dog fights. It’s just as well that these guys don’t have access to aggressive bloodlines from more big ferocious breeds. Personally, I wish they would castrate owners who deliberately breed and train dogs for aggression and blood sport.
I have to say that the fila Brasileiro is in a much worse state than the pit bull.
AKC and UKC variants of the the bull and terrier type have been selectively bred away from aggression. Aggression can pop up in these strains, but it’s not as likely.
The problem is that the fila’s breed standard requires them to be quite aggressive towards strangers. That’s a breed trait, which they call ojeriza.
This is a dog that is about the size of an English mastiff, but it is being bred to be the most dangerous dog possible.
I just don’t get it.
Retrieverman recently posted..Four years old
Amazing stupidity:
http://www.mindspring.com/~anableps/Image%20Pages%20folder/Ojeriza.html
Retrieverman recently posted..Frito
It is important to recognize that there are TWO standards for the fila. One, CAFIB, makes much of ojeriza. The other, FCI/CBKC, moves away from it, though still emphasizes aloofness and being a good guardian.
Brazil is not going to give up its national dog. It is good to see that the registry that downplays aggression is more popular than the one that values it.
see: http://www.fila-brasileiro.org/compare_breed_standards.html
Proponents of the “true” APBT will consistently say that there is not supposed to be any aggression towards humans, because one needs to be able to handle them, historically even when they are high on killing in the dog ring.
Not so for the other breeds spoken about here, like the Fila, Tosa, Dogo, Presa, etc. Even for the dog ring fighters like the Tosa, there seems to be no mention of making them friendly to all humans for safety’s sake. They were also used as guards.
Extreme territoriality is something few folks need, and fewer know how to handle.
My co op bans pit bulls ( although one board member told me on the side they are more concerned about PUREBRED APBTS), dobermans and rottweilers. I would really love to tell them that if they have to pick three, some of the ones mentioned here would be my choice.
Of course, since they are rare breeds this is not likely to happen. The “pit bull” ban was based on one dog in the building attacking a board member’s dog, and another shareholder – a nervous nelly with an unhealthy extreme attachment to her tiny poodle/bichon mix – complaining loudly.
Years later, a board member’s chow attacked another shareholder’s dog. I did not see a ban on chows being put into effect.
I WOULD, if I had to choose three dogs more likely to enter the building, choose the Chow, Akita and bullmastiff, for their propensity to be not only territorial of property and humans but also because they are not as responsive when it comes to working with their humans.
I might still keep the rottie simply based on the fact that it is not only quite numerous, but the largest of the three and quite difficult to stop because of this.
I get so frustrated with some of my fellow pit bull advocates. I can understand the defensiveness, but I think they lose themselves and forget exactly what they’re arguing for. (Granted, it’s tough arguing with people who are pro-BSL because of all the goal-post switching.)
But I find the mis-use of statistics by the pro-BSL crowd the most frustrating. You can’t group all “pit bulls and mixes” together and then try to compare that group with a single other breed of dog. Yes, I know that pointing it out won’t (usually) change hearts and minds, but I can’t help bitching about it. That, and the denial of field identification problems with unknown, mixed-breed dogs are my biggest sticking points.
I think most reasonable pit bull advocates such as myself will readily agree with you on most of your points above.
It’s clear that BSL is the reason for the least supportable arguments being made.
When the municipalities say “we can ID a pit bull” … the response becomes “no you can’t, they aren’t even one thing.”
When the justification for the law being enforced pro-actively is “this is in their blood, they are destined to attack” the response is “they’re blank slates, it’s all training.”
Etc.
I’d rather try and argue the truth versus the most expedient political strategy; discover and change reality vs. the political or legal climate.
I think you’ve slightly misconstrued some of the arguments.
It’s not so much that pit bulls “aren’t even one thing” (though they aren’t), it’s that a couple generations down the pike of random breeding, just about *everything* looks vaguely bulldog-like. When a shelter counts anything with a thick muzzle and short coat as a “pit bull mix”, and the media reports every bite incident involving a broad-headed dog as a “pit bull mauling”, you have a skewed public perception of both the prevalence of bulldogs in shelters and as represented in bite statistics. And surely no anti-pit-bull person is going to argue with a straight face that “being vicious is in their blood” when we can’t even agree on what “blood” that is. Is it APBT lineage? Anything in the collective bulldog family? One drop of bulldog blood? A lab/boxer mix that happens to look vaguely bulldog-esque? Do they magically carry the vicious blood because of the shape of their snout, regardless of actual DNA connections? I mean, with the understanding that a boxer was actually bred for human aggression while a pit bull was not.
I’m sure you’ve seen the online collections of newspaper and TV reports misidentifying bite incidents as involving “pit bulls” or “pit bull mixes”, right?
You’re also misconstruing the argument about their “nature” and whether it’s “in their blood” to attack. Human aggression and dog aggression are not the same thing, for one. For another, many… many breeds of dog are of working temperament and high drive. That’s not what leads a dog to bite.
The consistent factors in severe dog bites are untrained, unsupervised, and intact dogs–regardless of breed or type. Any molossoid type dog has a larger, more muscular head than the pit bull. Any guardian-type breed has a long, proud lineage of breeding for “human aggression”. Any nordic breed has far more stamina and endurance and “never say die” attitude. Any scent- or sighthound has a thousand years more breeding for the pursuit and killing of small animals than the bulldog does.
Bulldogs weren’t bred for murder. They were bred to tackle a job and see it finished–they were America’s first all-around farm dogs. If the owner points that energy to belly rubs and hard runs on an agility course, that’s what it’ll do, same as any border collie. If the owner lets it run rampant and kill small animals, that’s what it’ll do–same as the aussie mix, cocker spaniel, and husky that tore my cat to shreds as a child.
On the other hand, herding dogs are bred to control the movements of large mammals using a combination of their teeth and a high-strung, control-freak nature. A herding dog which is untrained, unsupervised, unexercised, and left to its own devices is statistically pretty likely to bite a child in the face. Is that what they were bred to do? No. Can any high-drive working dog bite if mismanaged? Yes.
An Australian Cattle Dog carries in its DNA the drive to nip cows to control their movements, but I’m sure you’d never suggest that a border collie carries “in its blood” the destiny to bite a child, right? Because cattle are not children, and how a dog interacts with the world is no more 100% nature or nurture than how a child grows up to interact with the world.
I absolutely agree that some of the pro-pit bull folks go overboard in denying that their dogs are dogs and capable of anything any other dog is capable of. I have not actually found that pit bull folks are more anti-breeder than any other “rescue” people anywhere. I think that’s true of all people who equate homing random-source dogs with pulling a child out of a burning building and delivering successful infant CPR.
Re: Every dog looks like a bully breed: um no, don’t be silly. Bully breeds look like bully breeds. This isn’t complicated or obscure. We know how genetics works and we know that traits are heritable and we know that if you breed an a Labrador and a Poodle you don’t get a bully or anything that looks like one.
Nor are the “you can’t ID a pit bull” claims worth anything. If you want to claim that there are several other breeds that look the same, where does that get you? None of the other breeds that you’d point to are free from the same history of being bred for gameness / fighting / attacking / baiting / hunting. It’s sort of like complaining that it’s really easy to misidentify the country origins of East Asians (omfg they all look the same!) and then saying that there aren’t significant convergences and overlaps in genetics, history, religion, language, art, music, dance, couisine, martial arts, mythology, etc. The other bully breeds are not distinct enough in form or function or history or culture for this observation to hold much water.
We can spend hours playing the American Bulldog Johnson type vs. Scott type vs. American Pit Bull Terrier vs. American Staffordshire Terrier vs. Staffordshire Bull Terrier game all day (and that’s just the close breeds that might actually get confused) … but to what end? Not one of them fails to meet the negative criteria associated with the bully breeds. There are no magic exception dogs here that would unjustly get caught in the net so to speak.
Sigh.
Do you have any idea what a 3/4 lab/ 1/4 shar-pei mix looks like? Or a boxer crossed with a hound?
Anything with a short coat, wide(ish) muzzle, and broad skull “looks like a pit bull” because the actual definition of “pit bull dog” according to discriminatory laws is more or less “anything with a short coat, wide(ish) muzzle, and broad head”. It’s kind of like saying you believe in the bible because the bible says it’s true.
Furthermore, by attributing deadly traits to anything with a particular phenotype you are proving your exact point that saying “OMG all black people look alike” and acknowledging that melanistic races may share some overlaps in genetics, culture, etc, you are ignoring the significant differences in genetics, culture, upbringing, etc that causes us also to say “but not all black people are criminals”. It’s hilarious that you’d draw the opposite conclusion and feel satisfied to rest there. What a bizarre justification.
Also by saying that “bully breeds are not distinct enough in form or function or history or culture to draw any distinction between them” is… well, even more bizarre. Do you draw any distinction between Australian Cattle Dogs, Border Collies, GSDs, and Corgis? Although you may have an uneducated eye when it comes to bulldog types, they look and function as differently to us as your herding breeds do to you. Ignorance is no justification for genocide.
Your last paragraph is, frankly, nauseating. I suspect I’m going to get a chance to address the notion in your other responses, so I’ll leave this one at that.
So let us shed a tear for the tens of 3/4 Lab 1/4 Shar-Pei dogs out there that are being given a bad name due to the misdeeds of Pit Bulls. May their burden not go unnoticed.
You’re recycling anti-BSL arguments that are rather pointless in this context. This is not a pro-BSL post. Complaining that there’s collateral damage in the enforcement of BSL says nothing to the extant and very real problems that do exist in both pit bull culture and pit bull genetics.
Continued comparison to human issues doesn’t add as much clarity as it does distraction. Human eugenics is reviled, it’s the name of the game in dogs. Racism is a negative in humans, breedism is a positive in dogs. Etc. While there are plenty of comparisons to be made, especially since dog culture is really human-directed-dog-culture… it’s not the culture of wild animals breeding and behaving on their own… but that doesn’t change that fact that minds are more likely to close than open when making such comparisons. Why compare the pit bull problem to the Black incarceration problem when there’s not much clarity in the later that would inform the former, rather there is a lot of political correctness, posturing, and denialism. Even if apt, the probability that such a conversation would be derailed is high, and potential solutions to one side would not be applicable to the other. Dogs aren’t people after all and they don’t have rights. Principle vs. expediency and efficacy doesn’t apply.
Christopher all I can say…have you seen a Collie mix with a pitbull yet? http://www.buzzle.com/articles/information-about-the-border-collie-pit-bull-mix.html
Now this does not look like a Border Collie to me at all. Just as I saw a Rough Collie/pit bull mix. Look at them attempting to prove that “Happy” has the qualities of a Border Collie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NWx-Z-SFps8 I have not idea what planet these people come..https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mwm0OwqWvF4
Re: The Biased Media
Again, this argument gets you nowhere. A biased media doesn’t cause dog bites, doesn’t cause maulings, and it doesn’t cause deaths. More importantly, it doesn’t cause these dogs to be over-bred nor does it cause them to be abandoned in droves before they’re 2 years old in shelters.
The supposed “Bad Rap” might keep some people from adopting them, but Pit Bulls don’t have an adoption problem, they have a dumping problem. It’s NOT the case that they are simply being dumped in shelters at rates equal to other dogs and boo hoo not being adopted again. Plus, there’s the yuppie liberal bleeding heart cachet with pit bulls too, which makes up in part for the stigma others might have. And really, why should we be giving these dogs a better rap? We certainly don’t want more of them being bred and it’s certainly not wise to be putting more of them in homes of people who would otherwise not want one.
As you agree, they are not a simple plug-n-play breed, so why encourage them to be more popular? They’re not appropriate pets for many people.
So the “biased media” argument doesn’t solve any problems and it makes the entire movement look like a bunch of complainers and denialists. It’s not a bad rap, it’s a series of very REAL factors that are not being addressed from within the community by people who are NOT being deluded into hating the dogs unjustly.
Jesus wept. A biased media doesn’t “cause” deaths by dog bite, it just “causes” people like you to have a profound misconception of the root cause of dog bites by reporting falsehoods for the purpose of sensationalism.
If a newspaper lets three fatal maulings involving lab mixes, huskies, and chows go by without a peep, then publishes hysterical headlines using the phrase “pit bull mauling” involving a guy that got bitten on the calf by a dog that later turns out to be a lab X shar pei, folks like you are not going to notice the microscopic retraction published a month later on a back page. You’re just going to remember the hysterical “pit bull mauling” report.
Here, for example, is a collection of misidentifications in media: http://www.understand-a-bull.com/Articles/MistakenIdentity/WrongId.htm
No breed is a simple “plug-n-play” breed. Certainly border collies aren’t. Neither are borzoi or redbone coonhounds or basenjis. I’m not advocating for ANY breed to become “more popular”. I’m advocating for people, particularly dog owners, to have some modicum of sense about a breed that is JUST a dog, just like your dogs.
Again, more complaining about reputation all for nothing.
The truth is that the pit bull has too GOOD of a reputation. Too many people are getting them and then finding out the reality and dumping them before they reach 2 years old. They’re being sold on a dog and the reality is obviously less than expected. And none of this has to do with the media and dog bite reports or BSL or stigma or anything. It’s not a “bad rap” that puts these dogs into too many homes and it’s certainly not a “bad rap” that drives them from those homes soon thereafter.
This line of debate is rather like complaining about the paint job on the Titanic as it sinks. It’s entirely irrelevant.
I’m with you on the media controlling public perceptions of which breeds do the mauling, as if it’s all one breed or type. But I see Chris as saying that the bites have to be prevented to begin with. Don’t fuel the fire.
And no, not every dog is plug and play. Not BCs either. But who ever said they were? Nobody here. I think Chris had an entire post explaining how picky he is in homing the few dogs he breeds.
Mixie let us get back to reality. Just read what responsible homeowners and renters now face …https://www.esurance.com/info/homeowners/does-homeowners-insurance-cover-pit-bulls
It’s absolutely in their blood to attack. That’s the entire reason for the history of ALL the bully breeds. There hasn’t been any concerted effort to breed this out, nor is there a simple genetic mechanism to do so. Trying to breed gameness and attacking out of a bully breed is like trying to breed CEA out of Rough Collies. When it’s reached saturation due to selection pressures for it, you can’t just get rid of it unless you essentially dilute it out. And really, there’s no documentation that this has been done with any bully breeds. And selection within such a stilted gene pool will only get you so far and it presumes that you have enough dogs that are not genetically stacked to start with. Doubtful. And if you did, what’s the point, why not just pick a breed more suited to your goals?
It’s not like these breeds do anything that can’t be done better by a menu of other breeds.
As for what leads to bites, OF COURSE having a working temperament and high drive increases a dog’s chance of biting! Jack Russel Terriers are little obnoxious bite machines. Australian Shepherds can easily be riled into snapping! If you run away from an Aussie you can get their herding instinct to kick in and they will nip at your heels and I’ve even had one go for my calf and thigh.
Border Collies have actually had a strong selection history AGAINST biting because it is a DQ at trials (and the breed is a trial breed, through and through) so dog that worries sheep on the field will not succeed and not be bred and one that worries animals on the ranch will be shot. STILL, the drive to herd makes them willing to engage people. A Border Collie will have no problems using their body to herd people in large groups and as puppies, if you’re wearing socks, you can expect them to go for your ankles and tug.
It’s absolutely in their blood! The big difference between the herding breeds and the bully breeds is that there is no history of being bred for further gameness and fighting and we don’t really see those behaviors.
It’s also the reason that GSDs are actually more closely related to Mastiffs than they are the herding dogs. The Germans simply couldn’t find the blood necessary to create a protection and attack dog within the shepherd dogs.
> Bulldogs were America’s First All-Around Farm Dog.
B.S. They weren’t the first, they were never the best, nor were they very popular in this manner. The collie landrace is and was this dog, from text, lithograph, and photos, it’s the collie landrace that has served this end and still does.
I’d like to see the statistics you claim on this because most herding animals do not go to the face at all, they are much more likely to target the ankle on their charges and I’m sure adults and children have been nipped in this manner. Herding dogs almost never go for the face because it’s a poor means of steering animals and is highly likely to make them scatter, which is against the point.
There are heading dogs used in herding, like the BC, but they rarely grip to the face because this is not an effective means of moving animals and as I’ve already discussed, biting of all types is highly discouraged genetically in the breed. Biting the head used in some specific situations in some breeds but it’s much more likely in dogs being used one on one with a big animal like a bull instead of groups of animals like sheep.
These are almost always designated as cow-dogs or cowy dogs and I would not doubt that when future scientists map the canine genome to behaviors if there is not a significant overlap with face biting found in cow dog strains of herding dogs and the bull dog, and probably a common origin as well. There are certainly mixes and newer breeds that are used on Cattle that could easily have documented bully blood in them.
That’s not as comforting as you’d think. First, if the observation is true and accurate, it’s coming from a unique perspective of someone breeding dogs for competition. The standard of selection there is much more specific and demanding, bringing many qualities together. The implication is not likely that such traits disappear but that they are not in the right combination or at the desired degree for the task at hand. This isn’t encouraging for any performance dog where you can have certain elements of performance become unhinged from other important elements.
Here you get misplaced drive or obsessive compulsive factors which might have been rightfully culled by a high level breeder but would cause many problems for pet dogs and their owners. This is not an unheard of issue in many breeds, including Border Collies.
Second, genetically genes don’t just disappear, especially if they have ever been selected for. Even something that is mostly well known and easy to test for at any age like coat color, would be very hard to remove from a population where it was saturated. Complex behaviors are likely caused by 2 or more genes and this is why they “disappear” but they are no more gone than any recessive is “gone” until it’s not.
The propensity to “attack” is carried in the blood of ALL ground-game hunting breeds, all guardian breeds, all all-purpose catch and farm dogs. Terriers, podencos, curs, feists, coursing dogs, scent hounds, molossers, blah blah blah. All bred for “gameness”, all bred to fight to the death. Yet somehow we manage!
As far as bulldogs being all-around farm dogs, take a look at the American Bulldog and the wide collection of curs living and working in America. They’ve been bred and used for all-around farm work since the very beginning–your ignorance of working bulldogs is no excuse for genocide of an entire landrace just because you prefer a fluffier, more co-dependent pooch.
And you know… after I read that line about “it’s not like they do anything that can’t be done better…” I… honestly couldn’t come up with a logical response to that. I can’t come up with a plausible reason people would enjoy the company of a wiiiiide variety of breeds, but I’m also not narcissistic enough to imagine that my tastes and preferences are an excellent determining factor in deciding what breeds and types of dogs other people may be legally allowed to enjoy.
I don’t actually own a pit bull, by the way, though you’d hate my dog because he looks like one. There are three pit bulls in my neighborhood that are very friendly. There’s also a yellow lab up the street that hits the fence snarling like Cujo every time I walk by.
The understanding of variations among different types is very poor.
Yes, in hunting dogs, they are bred to be aggressive toward animals; but consider this: with breeds bred to hunt fur-bearing animals, they are very soft-mouthed and they are supposed to be soft-mouthed not to damage the pelt. Likewise, many retrievers are soft-mouthed to avoid damaging the meat of birds. Ontop of that, there are several herding breeds (for dairy cows) which still retain the prey drive, but lack the will or ability to kill the prey. So, there is a strong genetic component to it.
The only group of breeds Pitbull can be compared to is other terriers. It makes no sense to compare livestock guardians, hunting or herding breeds to them since none of these breeds have been selected for “gameness” or “the will to fight” as extreme as the terriers. For example, compare and contrast the difference between a baying dog (ie. Coonhounds or Plott Hound) and a catch dog (ie. Airedales, Jadgterriers and so on). The temperament are very different, and a catch dog is far more willing to fight than a baying dog will.
Secondly, to group curs with the bully clade is misleading. Curs are not bully-breeds at all. They are mostly derived from collies and pinscher-stock with a bit of hound mixed in. They belong more into the hound-group than anything else. The American Bulldog was never meant for herding– it was meant as a catch-dog for the purpose of collecting wild hogs back when the standard husbandry was letting pigs roam free. Curs, on the other hand, did and do a lot more than holding a swine by the ear.
So, while you accuse the blogger of making blanket statements, you are also using the same tactics without any understanding of dog-breeding, breed history or genetics.
Dave recently posted..Retrieving Laika
Yes, pit bulls are not unique in their genetic history. But again you’re arguing against BSL or perhaps the notion that since there are other problematic breeds that they are all equally problematic or that they are all equal in the problematic measures of bites and shelter intakes. But they’re not.
Again, you keep implying that I’m somehow complicit in the pit bull genocide you keep talking about. I’ve never gotten one and ditched it in a shelter. The genocide is not being committed by people who never wanted a pit bull, it’s being fueled by people who at one time thought they did want one and then changed their mind after actually owning one. I’m not failing pit bulls, pit bulls are failing pit bulls.
You’re wrong. I would suggest that Border Collies carry in their genes the propensity to bite a child on their legs. This behavior has been bred into the dogs and there’s no magic human-vs-sheep switch!
The dogs are keyed in on movement patterns, not breed, and if children move like sheep … which they can easily do… the dogs can and DO react to them in this way. Want to get a Border Collie riled up next time you’re at the dog park? DANCE in front of it. See what happens.
The rest of your arguments have to do with BSL. It doesn’t matter how much we want to assign nature-vs-nurture or if there is even as much of a distinction there as the dichotomy implies (there isn’t). More and more science is coming around to there being little nurture and a lot of nature given just how much of our learning and reactions have to do with our nature, and likewise how much nurture has influenced nature given that we self select breeding partners!
The truth is that behavior has a significant and potent genetic component and this is real and undeniable. Dogs are NOT blank slates.
Oh, goodie. So you do agree that border collies carry in their blood the destiny to attack and that only good management prevents them from doing so?
I wonder about terriers that carry in their blood the destiny to kill, being one mismanagement away from mistaking a child for a rodent. And a foxhound which carries in its blood the destiny to attack. Or a borzoi, a greyhound, a blackmouth cur? All carry in their blood the destiny to attack and and kill.
Yet somehow you imagine that with hundreds of breeds of dogs created to use their mouth to kill something, only broad-headed and short-coated dogs carry the magic spark of uncontrollable homicidal insanity. Strange.
No, it’s not a destiny to attack, you have a very crude understanding of genetics, behavior, and the difference between probability (which can vary greatly from rare to frequent) and hypothetical ability.
It is not simply good management that prevents a Border Collie from biting people more, there is a decided genetic component that is of great significance. In a great deal of dog sport events I have attended, with a great majority of the participants being Border Collies and other herding breeds, and despite the highly energetic and charged setting with many dogs, barking and lots of strangers and kids, the only bite I witnessed was from a pit bull to a man’s face.
Another pit bull, Wallace, put on the best performance of the day and would go on to win a National title. Now, both of these dogs could be an exception, but one is reinforcing the stereotype and the other is countering it. No one here, least of all me is making the some-all fallacy. And again, this isn’t about BSL or who effective it might be or how it might be abused or how unfair it might be to X Y and Z. This post is about unsupportable arguments and twisted thinking.
funny, at the agility trials I go to (which is very very many), I see Australian shepherds, Shelties, ACDs and border collies… and Malinois … biting at their handlers all the time. Oh, they’re just “nipping”…
In contrast, I’ve never seen any of the (rare) APBTs/ASTs or SBTs engaging in that behavior. Nor the Rottweilers either. OTOH, my own APBT was routinely “attacked” by border collies. Guess which dog got blamed when my dog responded to the other dog?
Anecdotes are not evidence.
I don’t even know what you mean by “pit bulls”. I frankly doubt you could go through your local shelter and properly identify a purebred APBT or AST from all the broad headed shorthaired dogs… not because you’re unique. Very few people can.
And if the dog isn’t a purebred, it’s a mixed breed. And calling it a “pit bull” because it has a blocky head and someone thinks it looks “bully” doesn’t give it any unique breed characteristics.
You may not approve of BSL, but your language is highly charged eg “bred to attack”.
The APBT, like all terriers, is bred to have a high prey drive and in the past that drive was selected towards other dogs. This is an extremely difficult behavior to maintain (since it is unnatural) and most dogs specifically bred for fighting in fact did not/could not
There is not the slightest shred of evidence that the vast majority of dogs accused of biting people (let alone the dogs that caused fatalities) are anything other than mixed breed dogs.
That face bite you witnessed is unfortunate. I agree that terriers are specifically bred to not have the bite inhibitions that most other dogs have on some level, but again, that is on other animals, and in the case of the APBT, may or may not include other dogs, depending on the lines you get these days ( many do have the tendency sort of drowned out, so to speak, for the public), but if you do defend genetics, historically the animals were bred to NOT direct their fighting propensity towards human beings.
Within every breed is an occasional dog that genetically doesn’t tow the line intended. I have a kelpie that won’t herd sheep, and surely there will be an APBT or other terrier out there that WILL direct it’s fight will to people and not just animals.
As will some BCs and other herding breeds direct biting to people and not sheep or cattle; particularly if bored and frustrated, and not given guidance as to what to do with it’s instincts.
Come to think of it, LOTS of frustrated, energetic pent up dogs take their genetic tendencies and re-route them. A herding dog that never sees sheep, does not necessarily go mad or lives an unsatisfying life w/o seeing sheep IF it is directed to other energy zapping sports, like agility, disc, triebball, schutzhund ( for the malinois), etc. Therefore, how much of what happens is that specific to genetic controlling what a dog focuses on, and how much of it is about the pure energy of the dog?
I went to a dog park in NYC. NYC is a hard place to keep a border collie, but of course in Manhattan, everyone just HAS to have EVERYTHING. Lots of BCS, German shorthaired pointers and other dogs not traditionally considered suitable for the city, seem to be here.
So it may not seem surprising that in this small dog park, I found myself in a pit bull support group ( not therapy group but rather pit bull fans), where there were many “Pit bulls”, some mixes and a few pure APBTs, along with a border collie and some mutts.
All the pitties were playing together happily. No issues. There were about a dozen of them. The only animals in the place that showed any potential for problems were a tiny, defensive, snarling white toy dog ( poodle mix?) and a liver and white BC, showing tons of lip over his ball, and bristling hair.
Anecdotes about what i saw, the bite Chris saw, etc, could go on all day. Genes or no genes, there are so many variants on everything now, there doesn’t seem to be ANY point in arguing behaviors as if they were conclusive w/o any serious studies.
Dog breeds are not equal. Trying to over-generalize is a silly tactic. Breeds are real, race is real, genetics are real. Bully breeds aren’t even close to being generic dogs so the idea that they are just like every other dog is asinine, it’s not true and it never will be.
And to argue such is really a dead end and dishonest because how can you promote a “pit bull” if you deny that you can even id one, and why suggest that they make great pets and are wonderful and desirable as pets outside of their reputation for fighting dogs if all dogs are “blank slates” …then we could say the same banal things about any dog. So it wouldn’t matter if there was BSL except to the people who are just so in love with the “look” … which again you say is so indistinct as to be pointless to put a name on.
You basically run into the problem of being an authoritarian nihilist, your philosophy is self-conflicting.
Liberal Vegan Women between 18-45 who “rescue” also overwhelming fetishized bully breeds and believe in over population and loathe breeders.
Dog breeds ARE equal in that they all carry traits that can be, and are, expressed negatively when not steered toward useful ends.
There is no such thing as a “generic” dog.
I am, actually, saying the same “banal” things about all breeds, and that BSL matters because it selectively targets a “look” when circumstance is far more deterministic when calculating the probability of a dog bite. That’s the point.
Mine is not that “pit bulls” are perfect generic dogs for everyone, because NO dog is a perfect generic dog for everyone. It’s that calling the cops because there’s a person with dark skin living in your neighborhood is a shitty thing to do. So is being afraid of a dog because it has a smooth, brindle coat and almond-shaped eyes, and that the “one drop” rule is no more accurate for dogs than it is for humans.
The fact that there is a class of people you dislike taking up a banner you dislike does not prove your point. Neither does me pointing out the legions of people who fetishize tiny dogs, believe in overpopulation, and loathe breeders but who aren’t lumped into a political or dietary group.
Possibility and probability are two very different things. Dogs are, by far, the most unequal species on the planet! A Great Dane is not equal to a Chihuahua any more in behavior than they are in stature. All dogs have teeth thus all can bite, but the similarities end there. Plenty of small breeds are yappy and snappy, and if they didn’t weight 4 lbs they’d be a menace far greater than any bully breed. A 50 lb Jack Russel Terrier would truly be a terror.
But we don’t think all bites are equal. A JRT can savage an infant, but is entirely unlikely to kill an adult. There are plenty of gigantic breeds that have that potential but we don’t see them exercising it. And no, we have no reason to believe that Average Joes are training JRTs to be snappy and Berners would turn out the same except by magic all their Average Joe owners happen to know perfect techniques to train bite prevention.
But once again, you’re wandering off into pointless BSL nonsense instead of addressing the real problems in the breed. And the real problem isn’t that their outlawed. The real problem is that they are popular. The problem is not that they are unappreciated as blank slates, the problem is that they carry unsavory genetics. The problem is not that haters hate, it’s that those that CHOOSE the breed don’t keep them and those that LOVE them for all their supposed genetic gifts deny that they are the most rejected breed on the planet, the biggest let down and failure to those that amazingly overcome that bad rap and acquire them in droves anyway.
I have to go with you there. There seems to be good reason for a lot of people who care about a breed, to fear it ever becoming POPULAR.
Popular means “I gotta have one!” w/o really thinking about why you want something, except that Kim Kardashian has it so it must be cool!
Not that I think KK is cool. Bleah!
One more comment, then I’ll stop spamming up your blog ;0)
I just finished reading a dog husbandry manual from the 1850s where the author goes to great lengths to explain that bloodhounds are not the savage mankillers that media and popular culture have hyped them to be. Some things never change. Every generation needs a breed of dog to demonize.
Have you read ‘The Pit Bull Placebo’, Mixie? It goes into that cycle in detail. It seems over the past hundred years the media’s ‘killer breed of the era’ went like this: Bloodhound > Newfoundland > German Shepherd > Doberman > Rottweiler > Pit Bull
The original “Newfoundlands,” which were more like Chesapeake Bay retrievers, were commonly used for fighting.
retrieverman recently posted..Classifying the Rottweiler
The problem you still have is that the media coverage and reputation of the breed doesn’t change anything structural or substantial about the actual problems in and with these dogs. Changing the name and changing the press doesn’t change anything than your ability to make yourself FEEL better about the dogs.
…Changing the press so that they accurately report on the breed or mix of dog involved would be a start at resolving the reputation issue. The bloodhound was no more a homicidal maniac when the media was calling them so, than they were a few decades later when the focus changed and a new boogyman was found.
Who cares about the reputation issue? Again, these dogs are too popular as it is. It’s obvious that fewer people, not more, should own them. These dogs are not suffering because of a bad reputation… what are all the good breeders finding it too hard to find good homes? Boo hoo. It’s not a bad reputation that is driving these dogs into the shelters.
There is one little problem with the bloodhound literature. There were actually two types of bloodhound. One was the European lymer type that includes the so-called St. Hubert Hounds– what we call bloodhounds today. It was used for tracking wounded deer and boars, and it’s never been an aggressive dog.
The other type was the Cuban bloodhound. This bloodhound was actually very much like a Presa Canario and was common in Cuba, where it was used to catch cattle and runaway slaves. It was also used in the Maroon revolts in Jamaica, and (unsuccessfully) in the Seminole Wars. It became a slave catching dog in the United States, and a pair of them were used at the infamous Andersonville Prison.
A Cuban bloodhound was an aggressive dog, but the other kind of bloodhound never was.
retrieverman recently posted..Classifying the Rottweiler
They were also the dog used in ‘Uncle Tom’s Cabin’, I believe, which is where they got widespread publicity.
Thanks for illustrating the fact that public misconceptions about a type of dog based on the name and a similar appearance can cause widespread hysteria.
The book I read was published in the mid-1800’s, written specifically about British working breeds and includes a lovely pen and ink illustration of the dog that we know today as a “bloodhound”. The several pages that followed argued their case using nearly identical language to that which we see in anti-BSL campaigns today about pit bull type dogs.
Out of curiosity, is there a reason to suspect the work of the National Canine Research Council?
It would be my observation that breeding for exaggeration is not limited to conformation, and that temperament no less open to misunderstanding than musculo-skeletal systems.
eli,
I have been looking into the multi-million dollar pit bull lobby and the organizations that actively rehabilitate the reputation of the pit bull, and the NCRC is nothing more than a think tank that turns out pro pit bull “research” and “studies.” The goal of the pit bull lobby and these organizations is to make sure that the pit bull is never banned, so that pit bull breeders can keep breeding these animals and that pit bull fighters can keep churning out these dogs in an attempt to make the perfect fighting machine. I know of no other breed that has its own lobby, which seeks to rehabilitate it and make it popular in the eyes of the public. They even have writers working for the breed on the Huffington Post. So yes, there is every reason to suspect NCRC.
Some of their “research” is so horrible! Like when they have one of their own shill apologist vets look at a PHOTO of a dog who killed someone and declare that it’s not a pit bull.
That’s the big piece of “evidence” they have for their “the media is a conspiracy” study which tries to claim that the evil media over identifies dogs as pit bulls in their mauling stories.
Just a reminder….the “National Canine Research Council” was essentially one person, a vet tech. It was “acquired” by Animal Farm Foundation, whose mission statement specifies that it is a pit bull advocacy group.
http://www.animalfarmfoundation.org/pages/About-Us-FAQs#ABOUT-FAQ4
This is not scientific research, it’s lobbying. There is plenty of scientific research out there on the fact that dog behavior has a strong genetic influence. Every breeder of working dogs has implicitly understood this for centuries, it’s only recently that pit bull advocates have launched a major denial campaign. The “flat earthers” of breed advocacy want everyone to believe that it’s “all how you raise them”, on the one hand, but hey, lets adopt out adult fight bust dogs because love and hope will magically transform any dog into a perfect family pet!
Just wanted to add that the idea that large numbers of pit bull type dogs are being misidentified is certainly not true here in the Northeast. We have no stray dog, or dog overpopulation problem, and most rescues are importing dogs from out of state to fill the demand for adoptable dogs. Leash laws and spay and neuter education have worked here….just not on pit bull owners/breeders. Despite all sorts breed-specific incentives, like low cost, (or even free)s/n, training support, low cost vaccinations, etc, pit bull owners continue to breed and dump their dogs.
The rate of s/n for labs, boxers, etc., is high here, while the rates of s/n for pit bulls is low. Lab, boxer, and sharpei owners are far more likely to obey leash laws, have their dog fixed, and not allow them to roam off leash.
When a dog that looks like a pit bull lands in a Massachusetts shelter, it is almost certainly a pit bull. Shelters may call it a lab mix, or a boxer mix, but the public is catching on to this game, and its certainly not helping the dogs.
Mmmhm. And back in the 70’s and 80’s when GSD-type dogs were popular amongst the same crowd and littered shelters for the same reasons, was that a good reason to conduct a campaign of genocide against GSD-types? Or might there have been a consistent set of socio-economic factors there that still hold true today?
The effects of selecting for such dogs is very obvious into current times. The GSDs have very shitty temperament compared to what they used to be. It is extremely difficult to find the old-type German Shepherd nowadays with the family-dog temperament.
What is your point?
Dave recently posted..Retrieving Laika
A campaign of genocide? Who is committing the genocide? It’s not the Cities with breed bans, they ban the breed so they can stop killing them by the thousands!
The genocide is being conducted not by any pit bull haters or even skeptics, it’s being committed by pit bull lovers. People who seek out this breed and then dump it. People who keep creating more of them while hundreds of thousands are thrown away and killed each year.
This breed isn’t being hated to death, it’s being loved to death.
It’s not that these dogs are not being given a chance, it’s that too many people are giving them a chance and they–both the dogs and the people–are failing. Droves and droves of failed relationships.
“A campaign of genocide? Who is committing the genocide? It’s not the Cities with breed bans, they ban the breed so they can stop killing them by the thousands!”
completely wrong.
The ban results in the seizures and killing of many dogs that some ACO thinks might be a pit bull (as well as the dogs of people who ignorantly bring an APBT into a breed ban location).. anyone who has been through Denver’s death row has testified that a huge proportion of the dogs called “pit bulls” are simply not. Denver has killed many thousands of these dogs since their ban was upheld a few years ago.
I certainly will not deny that there are too many “dogs that sort of look like pit bulls” being produced, and that too many are dumped.
You don’t understand that some large percentage of these dogs are dumped precisely because of prejudice, whether laws, or landlord or insurance practices and not just because the dogs are failing. Our overall shelter environment is certainly a cause of dogs dying unnecessarily… as is the irresponsibility of many owners. The dogs themselves are rarely to blame
Irresponsible owners is a crap-shoot argument for abandonment of pets.
Abandonment of pets is a symptom of what is wrong with society at large. If homes are stable, if the job markets are stable, pets are not abandoned, period.
So either two things need to be done if someone is truly is in it for the welfare of dogs: make living standards easily attainable for the general public; or make it a social responsibility to house the people. One or the other. Until this is actualized, either through capitalism or socialism, pet abandonment will continue to be an issue as long people are threatened with risk of losing their residences.
Shifting the blame for 60% intake consisting of Bully-breeds into the shelter onto irresponsible owners is a rather foolish thing to say. Why? If we look at countries with low-shelter intakes, often they are the result of stable economy with high living standards for everyone.
So, there is no point in wish-washing statistics. We should not be asking why shelter rates in United States is high– the answer is obvious when one looks at the economic welfare of the people. What we should be asking ourselves is why a significant number of dogs abandoned tend to have bully-phenotypes. Breeders and their desire to own the breed are failing the dogs, not the puppy-buyers.
I am not pro-BSL; but I am not going to lie about why it sees success in many parts of the world either. If people wish to avoid BSL, breeders of bully-breeds have to acknowledge the flaws in their dogs. Otherwise, we will be following the European footprint in the future where not only Pitbulls are banned but also many similiar South American breeds as well.
I am sorry, but breeders of Pitbulls and Staffies have failed to contain the problem. Since they are the ambassador of the breeds, and tout them as faithful companions, then the responsibility of ensuring that there are no dogs with bully-traits, pure-, mixed-, or unidentified, with bad temperament falls directly on the breeders themselves. But instead, the government is forced to step in.
Dave recently posted..Retrieving Laika
Don’t be a hata.
Be a laika.
Retrieverman recently posted..A leading dinosaur expert talks about the bible
The bans are a direct result of killings and maulings by pitbulls so again, pits and their owners are killing pits.
Well, not really. There aren’t enough serious pitbull attacks to justify bans.
More to the point, bans don’t work. The number of dog attacks in the UK has increased significantly since pitbulls were banned.
The definition of genocide…”The deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.”
Note that genocide is a term applied to humans, not domestic animals which are owned and selectively bred by humans. It’s an important distinction which seems to be lost on defenders of the status quo.
I grew up in the 60’s and 70’s and I recall the GSD was never demonized, it was a very popular family dog. The problems with GSDs today are the result of poor breeding practices, a fact which is widely known and accepted amongst GSD fanciers. As Dave pointed out, it is very difficult to find breeders of GSDs with the classic family friendly temperament, but they do exist…I have met several outstanding dogs in recent years.
What the GSD community has, that is completely lacking in the “pit bull” community, is some semblance of breed stewardship. When the primary stewards of a breed are, at best, grossly irresponsible bybers, and at worst, criminals and animal abusers,its fairly predictable that there would be LOTS of unwanted dogs with sketchy temperaments produced. And considering the fact that DA is accepted as “part of the breed”, and not recognized for what it is….a fairly miserable trait to have in a family pet…it’s no surprise that a lot of these dogs get dumped in shelters.
The hystrionics about genocide and “doggy discriminationm” won’t do a damn thing to reduce the number of pit bulls being bred and dumped by all the “pit bull lovers”. Low cost, even free spay and neuter doesn’t work, education doesn’t work, what do you suppose would? So far, no group of “pit bull advocates” seems to be able to inspire other “pit bull lovers” to do anything to stem the glut of poorly bred dogs which flood shelters across the country.
I can vouch for that “Northeast” claim as far as NYC and Long Island and places not far like the Hudson Valley go.
But NY is a big state and a lot of rural areas are much like the set of Deliverance. I can not vouch for how those populations do on the personal responsibility front.
Wow! Where to start? So many topics with in one that I’d like to comment on.
Personally, I think the bottom line is knowing the history of your choice of dog breed and personal responsibility.
BSL is nothing more than a bandaid on the oozing sore of irresponsible dog owners.
I am a pit bull owner, my pit bull is my service dog as well a therapy dog. In the course of our day to day life, we have dealt with both ends of the spectrum, those that chase us down to thank us for being a breed ambassador to those that demand we be removed from business because pit bulls can’t be service dogs to weirdos standing in the middle of Walmart with arms and head flung back praying to god to protect his humble servant from that vicious dog. (Said viscous dog had a bag of cheetos in her mouth that she was dropping into the shopping cart at that moment.)
In my opinion, a responsible dog owner knows the history of their breed, good, bad or ugly and does not make excuses for the traits that they find unacceptable, because whether they like it or not, those traits contribute to making the breed what it is.
Pit Bulls were originally bred to be dog aggressive. Until science can map out that specific gene for dog aggression and you can get a test to tell you if your dog carries that gene, you assume all pit bulls have some level of dog aggression and you make responsible choices and don’t put your dog in situations that set him/her up to fail. period.
Human aggression is an entirely different ball of wax. Pit bulls were never bred to be human aggressive, it has always been considered a fault. Louis Colby himself told me that human aggression should never be tolerated or excused in this breed, it should be culled. He said his father would shoot a human aggressive dog. (The Colby family are considered the founders of the pit bull breed in America.)
Greyhounds will give chase to small darting animals, collies will herd, dachshunds dig, shepherds will guard, retrievers will fetch, and so on. Of course, there are always exceptions to the rule, but dogs where originally bred for certain jobs and have been classed as such long before they were bred into specific breeds.
I have long said that if a dog is unsound, it should be put down. I don’t care what breed it is.
As for the Media, I have a whole lot to say about them after working in advertising and marketing for 6.5 years. To sum up my opinion of the media, for the most part they are noting more than rank whores vying for the larger portion of the ratings in order to capture the advertising dollar.
The Media is very guilty of sensationalism in reporting. We all know that.
You can not change the past, nor can you bury or excuse it. To do so is a disservice to the breed and yourself.
A person who truly loves this breed also knows it’s history and it’s short comings, they don’t make excuses, they simply are responsible dog owners.
Cheers.
Do you mind if I ask why you chose to have a pit bull as a service dog? Have you ever had to travel to an an area with BSL? It seems like an unlikely choice, due to the history of the breed itself as well as the extreme reactions you describe (including the positive ones – it seems like it’d be very distracting to the dog). Service dogs have a tough enough job to do.
What a strange question.
I know a group that trains and places borzoi as service dogs to veterans returning from war with PTSD. Borzoi can be difficult dogs, can be very dominant, and can be aggressive. They’re dramatically attention-grabbing and bred with a lengthy history of pursuit and killing of canids much larger than a pit dog.
But there are a handful of good reasons why this group believes they are good candidates for this work, and choosing a breed of dog, or anything in your life, based on other people’s misconceptions would not seem to me a good way to live your life. Arguing simultaneously that you shouldn’t work a bulldog because people might hate it and also love it is… very strange.
Yes, I’ve seen unusual breeds used as service dogs – dachshund (seizure alert), papillon (hearing), labradoodle (for wheelchair-bound), pyrenees (for autistic child). I used to train my dog with a club that placed service dogs in all sorts of situations, and I’ve donated a puppy to such a program.
I was asking about *your* dog, though; don’t know why it’s “strange”. Was it because of the individual, or because of the breed? That is: did your particular dog have some specific qualities (like the ability to alert to seizures, can’t train for that), or did you specifically seek out a pit bull?
Borzoi seem like they’d be a poor choice, too. For someone with PTSD, it seems like they’d seek out a breed that is a bit less aloof and more human-oriented. Unless they’re dealing with a specific line of dogs that is bred for those qualities.
There is a good assortment of breeds that were developed specifically to work with and for people. Biddable, easy to train, calm in novel situations. Why choose a breed that needs extra caution or is known to be difficult, headstrong, or have instincts that make training more difficult?
It’s not “my” service dog and I won’t presume to answer for that poster. For other people, I could offer that they’re calm, friendly, unflappable dogs with low grooming requirements, a low degree of health concerns, and which have an extremely “soft” and biddable temperament, are easy to train and are calm in novel situations. As far as them being “difficult, headstrong, or have[ing] instincts that just make training more difficult”… I can’t answer that except to say that your difficulties in training a particular type of dog are not everyone’s difficulties. Bulldogs aren’t necessarily any more headstrong than, say, a coonhound. Just different.
For these folks, Borzoi are an excellent choice. They’re large and imposing-looking enough to provide comfort to a soldier who might feel the need for a dog that looks like it could have your back in a scary situation. They’re calm and quiet. They have a tough streak. They may not necessarily be looking for an ultra-clingy lapdog. They’re an unusual choice and perhaps not the choice for someone who needs a service dog to keep a constant eye on your every desire, jump to snappy attention and respond to a thousand different specific commands, but not everyone in need of a service dog wants a gun dog’s personality.
No need to get defensive. I’m just very interested in service dogs, since it’s one of the few valid careers a dog can have these days. And there’s such a variety of sources – some breed their own (like the golden/lab crosses used by Canine Companions for Independance), shelter dogs, or breeder donations.
I only know of one that uses pit bulls, which are placed with US military veterans. Not sure how they source the dogs, though.
I didn’t mean to offend you, but when you said “I am a pit bull owner, my pit bull is my service dog…” I thought it meant that you had a pit bull service dog.
When was the last time Borzois en mass were used to hunt wolves or coyotes in North America? 100 years ago? 150 at the most? Perhaps never. They are strictly a show-breed nowadays.
It takes five-generation to change a breed.
Dave recently posted..Retrieving Laika
You asked about my dog, so here goes. (I am in the middle of a move from CA to TX, so I may be slow to reply.)
I chose a pit bull because it was the best breed of dog for me. I needed a dog strong enough to pull a wheel chair and get me off the ground (I was -supposed- to end up in a wheelchair, I didn’t listen), yet small enough to comfortably fit under a chair, one that can keep up with me and not quit and one with a nice short easy to care for coat. A pit bull fit the bill.
My disability doesn’t stop me, it just slows me down, sometimes. Most dogs could not handle what I have exposed my dog to. She has been on little planes, big planes, kayaks, canoes, power boats, ferries, paddle boats, hot air balloons, elephant rides (real live elephant), Amtrak, metro trains, buses, trolleys, street cars, horse & buggy, tame amusement park rides, etc.
I do historical reenactment and go to Renaissance Fairs. She will pull a wagon in a period correct harness, demonstrate medieval hunting with dogs or take a nap with men in plate armor beating the hell out of each other 15 feet away from her after being unhorsed in a joust. I have never not been able to do things because she refused, she’s always up to what ever I want to do.
Through all of what we do, she is always on task until I undress her. Pit Bulls adapt well and have the drive to keep up with a person like me. They are very aware of their human and most are biddable, wanting to make their human happy. This makes pit bulls ideal working dogs. The only down fall to this breed as a working dog is dog aggression. My dog is fine with most dogs unless they are off leash, but even that is easily managed.
As to BSL, I am a Coast Guard Wife, I go lots of places. I challenged our old school district in CT when they denied me access and won a ruling forcing them to implement a service dog policy. I try to educate people & businesses about service animals first, if that fails, I will resort to litigation and I make that very very clear. I know the ADA well and can quote the law word for word.
I have traveled from Connecticut to Massachusetts (BSL towns), New Hampshire, Vermont, Maine, New York, Rhode Island, Virginia, Maryland and Washington, DC. I flew across the country to California with her in the cabin under my feet and will soon travel from the San Francisco area to the Houston area via the Grand Canyon.
Most military bases have banned pit bulls, but I have yet to run into a problem. We’ve been on bases in NY, CT, VA, DC and CA. I’ve been on the pier and had Admirals and Captains ask to pet my dog and ask me about her. She has been invited onto Coast Guard cutters & Navy Destroyers.
At Fort Drum, the Military Working Dogs were flipping the hell out, barking and lunging at my dog. The same thing has happened in Union Station in DC and at the White House. She glanced at them and kept on working.
My dog can detect muscle spasms before they occur. This has been verified by extensive testing by my neurologist in CT. She did not have that ability when we adopted her to train as a service dog. She learned it from my other pit bull and we shaped her response to them from wildly barking at my right foot to nudging me with her nose and forcing me to sit if I don’t pay attention to the nudge. She is task trained to over 30 specific tasks to mitigate my disabilities.
I adopted her as a one year old dog from a NY dog trainer who pulled pit bulls from shelters one at a time, put basic obedience and house training on them and adopted them out to permanent homes.
My dog has done a good deal of therapy work too. She has about 740 hours to date.
For the record, the WORST dog bite I have ever received was from an off leash Golden Retriever that attacked me and my dog. We both ended up being treated in the Emergency Room. My dog did not fight back, but now she is anxious around unleashed dogs, so we avoid them.
My next service dog will also be a pit bull.
Your dog sounds fantastic and I love your story! I really hope you never get kicked off of a base.
Thanks. Birdie is a great dog.
I really doubt that I will be kicked off a Military Base. If I do, I have a plan to address that through the chain of command. I grew up in the Military and I know it well.
Chris had a post where he listed the types of reactions by Apologeticists, and which made sense and which did not. In that piece he suggested somewhere that folks should create more situations where the public sees “pit bulls” doing good things, to change people’s minds.
So now you are trying to discourage that?
Okay, so they are too popular. Well that is not going to change overnight, so why not put a positive step forward while we try to cut the popularity with the undesirable folks down?
I’m not sure whether this was in response to me, so I’ll answer anyway.
I am very interested in service dogs. Not very interested in pit bulls. Truthfully, I avoid them, but I doubt my opinion would encourage anyone to do the same. Lots of people love pit bulls; two area shelters have special adoption programs and training classes just for pits.
I was curious about the service pit. If there are “good” pit bulls out there, where do they come from? Are there breeders who concentrate on sound temperament, biddability and less aggression? (although it turns out the dog in question has an unknown background).
Also wondering why the dog was chosen, and who trained it? Are there service dog schools that accept pits? Or did the dog just happen along? It seems that being a pit does make the dog’s job more difficult, from the owner’s stories of people freaking out when they see it.
I was also wondering about the difficulties that would arise if the owner needed to travel to a place where pit bulls are banned, although the owner seems to have that covered.
Yes, there are breeders who focus on sound temperament. I have been waiting for two years for a puppy from a specific breeder because she breeds for temperament and structural stability. She has 8 pit bulls that are certified therapy dogs. I trust her judgement to pick the right puppy for the job I need it to do. By the time she breeds her bitch next summer, I will have been waiting 3 years for one of her puppies.
When I met my dog, it was obvious she was very very sound. She and I melded together seamlessly from the day I adopted her.
Originally, there was a group located in Fairfield County, CT that would do owner training of service dogs. In the time it took me to find the right dog for the job (26 months) their insurance carrier changed the underwriting guidelines, prohibiting them from training pit bulls or pit bull mixes.
So, I worked with several trainers to train her myself. It took me 14 months and 156 hours to complete her training. I spent almost $5,000 on dog trainers. Then I paid a woman who trained service dogs for almost 20 years to test us with the agreement that if my dog didn’t cut it, I would pull the vest and she would be a pet. She took us to a RABBIT show at Topsfield Fairgrounds as a test! There were rabbits hopping around in harnesses. I almost had a heart attack. My dog could have cared less.
Until I left CT in January 2012, we met up every 12 – 18 months to make sure my dog met and exceeded the requirements for public access. I am very diligent about ongoing training.
Our training documentation and letters of need from my doctors have stood up in Federal Court.
My dog could really care less about what is going on around us unless it directly affects us. She completely ignores people freaking out. If someone invades our bubble, she will guide me away from them.
She is very aloof to people when working, but I do let people pet her from time to time because it is good for the breed and she enjoys a “pay check”.
I carry documentation that my dog has all her shots and two letters stating my need for a service dog, one from my neurologist and the other from my family doctor, at all times.
If I am traveling to a known BSL area, I go prepared with documentation. I have traveled to BSL areas without issue.
Hope that answers your questions. Sorry to be so scattered, I am pretty tired. The movers packed out our house today, tomorrow they pick up our stuff and then we are off to Texas via the Grand Canyon and Las Vegas.
Yes that was aimed at you, and thank you for the answer. 🙂
You know what? I avoid pit bulls too, when I’m with my own dog. WHen I am w/o him, it’s a different ball game. I’m always hoping to meet ANY dog that will come up to greet me.
It helps to think of service dogs as medical equipment, not animals. BSL cannot prevent a service dog from working any more than it can prevent a person from using a wheelchair. There have been at least two law suits.
That does not mean a person using a service dog will not be hassled about the matter, unfortunately.
Raegan recently posted..Is Skinner the Koehler of Clicker?
What I’ve heard about pits is that what makes them so dangerous is that they can go from zero to sixty with no warning. Pits don’t have the barking, growling behaviors that other breeds might have before they attack and/or bite. A pit bull can go from tail wagging to chomping without any of the behaviors that normally preceed biting. I’d be interested to know if anyone out there has the same perception? I don’t know enough pits to understand if my belief is true or not.
In my experience, 90% of “unpredictable dogs” is a case of a human not seeing or not understanding the signals the dog was giving.
I also think there is a difference between an aggressively based bite and a prey driven bite. The lead up behaviors are different. Aggressive bites are more likely to have the preceding behaviors of barking, growling, snarling, lip licking, etc, but also stillness and hard staring (which many people will not see or read as “I am getting ready to bite you if you do not back the fuck off”).
A prey driven bite will not usually have those same signals. You are more likely to see a tight, tension filled body than stillness. Often the tail is moving, which people interpret as happy friendly wagging, but it is a much tighter, more agitated twitching. There may be vocalization, especially if restrained, typically higher pitched and faster than threat barks.
IMO, prey driven bites are much more likely to be a savage, ongoing attack. The purpose is to kill prey, not stop the target from doing something the dog does not want. If your dog bites you when you try to move him off the bed, he stops biting when you stop trying to move him. Compare this to a dog that plays tug as long as the tug toy is moving like a wounded rabbit.
One theory I have heard from a Pit Bull fancier (whom I consider unusually level headed and logical) is that Pit Bulls have misplaced prey drive onto other dogs, and sometimes humans. Typically humans moving in a prey-ish fashion, i.e. children and bicyclers.
Raegan recently posted..Adam’s Task II: Preface
That seems logical and was certainly discussed when Kyle Dyer was bitten in the face by a Dogo. A breed that is hard to read by lay humans is a problem if they have the ability to do harm. Certainly no damage was done by the discussions which aimed to enlighten people to the subtle warning signs of a dog that is fearful.
Christopher agree because as you can view this link the “subtle warning signs ” applies to a number of breeds..http://www.dogliabilityquotes.com/
In most of the dogbite cases I’ve read, particularly ones involving toddlers, they ALWAYS say (regardless of breed) that the dog just ‘snapped out of nowhere’.
It’s ignorance on the part of the people.
Beware the dog that is too still.
I think that sums it up pretty well. Most dogs build up to a physical attack – posturing, snarling, staring, hackles raised, etc – to give the potential opponent the chance to back down.
For a fighting dog, such behaviors would have been selected against. A dog that simply stood and stared hard would be at a disadvantage if its opponent attacked first.
My dog was attacked by a pit bull in an off-leash park, and it was completely without warning. It was an unfamiliar dog, so I was watching it closely, and I’m pretty good at reading dog body language. There was nothing in the pit’s actions to indicate trouble. He had been standing with body and ears relaxed, tail neutral, not looking directly at my dog.
I have a friend who does a lot of work with shelter dogs and has had has experience and training with aggressive dogs. Wendy knows how to read the signals, and was nailed by a pit. Wendy was mauled so badly that a neighbor had to beat the dog off her with a shovel. Wendy had to be hospitalized. She said the dog was just standing there one moment and attacking the next.
Yeah, even if you can “read signals”, those signals can happen so quickly, we don’t always read fast enough. And we sure as hell cannot MOVE fast enough.
A dog can have a “signal” and then act on it, all in the blink of an eye. It may have nothing to do with reading ability. It may just be about how “it all happened so fast!…..Officer!”
Very interesting article, which will no doubt be taken negatively by the overly defensive.
As far as I’m concerned, the two biggest enemies to the pit bull type dog are the overly defensive parroters and the puppy peddlers, though out of the two I would have to say the former is the worst, because they often tend to downplay or deny traits such as dog aggression and not only encourage their own dogs to fail, but bring in misinformation that encourages other people to set their dogs up to fail. Point blank, if you cannot deal with a potentially dog aggressive animal, or you want to skip off to the dog park and demand that your dog have lots of doggy friends, pit bull type dogs are not the breeds for you
Pit bulls can be great dogs,very adaptable to any kind of sport or job. I always enforced thought that dogs are not blank slates,and are born with a specific temperament. Dog aggression is common in the breed,and they can also be territorial. I try to support the breed,but still have gotten attacked for saying anything remotely negative about them. My dogs have gotten into plenty of fights with loose Pits,you cannot deny dog aggression in the breed.
I think that yes, Pit Bulls are too popular.
I really like the breed, but then I enjoy terriers on the whole. I have volunteered in kill shelters, specifically to work with pit bulls (I noticed that most of the volunteers were avoiding walking them or training them, so I started to. I developed my fondness after exposure). I admit that I am biased towards the breed. I, in no way, feel that they are a good breed for everybody.
I don’t think Pit Bulls are inherently more dangerous than many other breeds, but I do think they suffer from being too popular. I think Labs and Goldens suffer in the same way; the only dog I have been attacked by was a lab. And some of the more unstable dogs I have been around were labs. Poor breeding practices do no dog any justice.
There is a genetic component, absolutely, but I think the genetic component is just a factor. A vast majority pit bulls do not kill people, and a vast majority never even bite people. Genes can indicate behaviors, but in the wrong hands (I won’t even say abusive; most environments aren’t.) it can be tragic. Wrong hands include people who get a hold of a high drive dog and stick it in a backyard on a chain, or fail to train and manage their high drive dog. There are statistical factors that many fatal dog attacks share, and the most consistent is a mismanagement or irresponsible care of the dog. Loose dogs, unsupervised dogs, ect.
You posit that Pit Bulls are the failure, that people get them and dump them because they turn out to be not what they wanted. I think the kind of people who want Pit Bulls to be a certain dog, fail the Pit Bull. Pit Bulls, like a lot of other high energy breeds and breed mixes, are dumped most often at shelters when they hit puberty. A cute, untrained pup becomes a menace (and not necessarily an aggressive one, just a jumpy pushy brat) from simply being a poorly kept high energy dog. One to two years seems to be the most common age for dogs in general to get dumped: old enough to wear out the puppy cuteness, or old enough to not be new and shiny, or old enough to be a much bigger dog than expected.
I think there are a lot of people who like the idea of a dog but are not actually prepared for the actuality of owning one.
All of that being said, most people should absolutely not own pit bulls. It is not that they are bad dogs, or broken, or inherently dangerous, it is because they are simply not a good fit for most people.
I think most killer dogs are a result of a perfect storm of genetics (a higher tendency towards focused gameness or instability or prey drive) and the environment they are raised; breed matters but it is not the only factor of consequence.
All that being said (I just discovered your blog and find most of the content fascinating…I’m sure I’ve blended a couple of posts together so please forgive me), I think the best thing for me to do as a pit bull supporter (and future pit bull owner) is to have the best dog I can. Socialize, train, manage any potential behavioral issues that arise, and educate when people ask questions. I think that is the best thing any dog owner can do for their breed.
That’s pretty solid advice. One thing that does get lost in the more loud pro- and anti- pit bull talk is the fact that for this breed to survive and thrive, there need to be people who own and breed quality dogs and who make an effort to create a positive public image of these dogs. Sure, it is hard to stick out when there’s just so much noise, but it’s the only thing that is going to save the breed in the long term.
So keep up the good work.
Christopher! Would love to chat with you about this article. I appreciated reading your brutal honesty.
Originally my main reason for being cautious of pit bulls were the attacks they have been responsible for (including an especially vicious one I witnessed against a 4 year old child in the mid 1980s). However, since becoming active in animal rescue work (as a non-PC pit bull realist), I’ve found the owners are the most disgusting aspect of pit bulls. I’ve seen them send death threats to people who have defended their dogs or themselves against pits, violate privacy of innocent people simply for disagreeing with them online, and engaged in other illegal and unethical behavior. It led me to research to find out why certain types of people are drawn to these dogs, and surprise, surprise: except for the naive rescue angels, most pit owners tend toward the sociopathic, criminal side of society that has poor impulse control.
AJ I too found myself in the same position and decided to do my own investigation. Shockingly a topic not viewed is the insurance risk of “Animal Exclusions” from home owners and Tenant Insurance not discovered until too late. https://dogbitelaw.com/insurance-for-dog-owner/where-to-get-dog-owner-liability-insurance.
No matter if someone likes it or not, the plain truth is that something is NOT a ‘stereotype’ if it’s REALLY HAPPENING. Pit bulls ARE the number one canine killer of people and animals, and have been since at least the 1800’s (fatalpitbullattacks.com). This shouldn’t surprise anyone since they were bred for centuries to be the ultimate canine killing machine. That is where the name PIT BULL comes from- they were thrown in a PIT with a BULL to kill it. Not rocket science. Much of the current mauling epidemic is squarely on pit advocacy which has been lying their ass off for 30 years about the pit bulls traits to get more adopted instead of dealing with the REAL problems- the gross backyard overbreeding of dogs most people don’t want, and that these dogs are NOT going to owners who are truthfully instructed about the real pit bull fighting dogs traits (explosive, disproportionate and unprovoked aggression,gameness, and their uniquely damaging hold and shake attack style) so they are ill prepared to handle, control, and contain the dogs.
I honestly don’t know what to say beyond our current experience. My border was more sensitive, happy, bouncy girl. We had another dog shepherd border mix who sometimes was a jerk to the border. No injuries or anything. More of a “I’m in charge” nip for honestly no reason. They were 8 years apart. As the mix was dying of old age (17 years old), my husband wanted to bring in his breed that he loves—-pittie (Am staff to be specific). Here are my honest feelings at first…
What the hell? My border wouldn’t be able to defend herself, and agression in any dog is not tolerated and this pit better not hurt my girl.
Here is how the meeting of him and her went. I’m not saying it was wise in his part (I wasn’t home). He had the pit on leash and the border on leash. The pit came in the house, and my sensitive border who is nervous around ALL breeds and size, began to play. Butt in the air, swatting, rooing. All happy and shocking. The pit did nothing. And from day one he did nothing. The dynaywas she would initiate play, he would be on his back and they would lightly play mouthing. Nothing that another breed wouldn’t do.
He was protective of her. If friend’s dogs came over and were chill, all were chill. If she was nervous, he would stand betwwn her and the dog upsetting her. If a human yelled at her for mooching/stealing good, again he would calmly come by her and between the human. (Although I didn’t see it. If I did, no one yells at my dogs!!).
So they were best of friends. We got news that she had leukemia. We thought a transition dog might help him and me. So we got a 4 mo old male out (neutered). From pup to a year, the pup really was a pain in the ass to the pit, border, and total spaz. Sweet as hell but he was a wild child. Tgen he hit 1 years old. Even though tgey ate in separate areas, if one came over to the other to try to get their food, you got full on dog on dog fighting. Yes it could happen to any breed due to food. We tried a behavorist for our existing pit because we saw in him resource guarding food, then toys, then us. It was stressfull for all but especially our existing pit. Finally there was a very serious dog fight with injuries between the pit. Short of it, the 1 year old went back into foster, wound up with his littermate brother and they have a great relationship.
The border and our pit though went back to their happy relationship. During the stress he never was negative towards the border.
We had to put my border down two days ago. It was gmheartbreaking for all. The pit smelled her body andvwhen the vet took her he was jumping up (no aggression) to the vet because he didn’t want her leaving with the border.
It’s been two days and the pittie is depressed . Today out of the blue he howled long and loud. He’s never done that. He does miss her.
I would love to get another border but after tge male pit pup incident I AM hesitant. A border would not survive an attack. I don’t want to lose another dog that is supposed to be mine. But I am lonely. I know it takes time but I am also realistic that our pit has unknown triggers. Personally I think the combo of us handling their relationship all wrong, he was male, he was super spazy, and a pit. I don’t believe pit with pit works for him.
So I’m 50-50 with pits and other dogs together. Just because they loved each other doesn’t mean he will get along with another female. But I also am aware that introducing two dogs together at different times and any breed leaves unknown dynamics.
Our pit is a great, loving dog. I liced his relationship with our border. But I am hesitant on having a two dog house with him and it really sucks.