i would never own a pitt, they are too big for my house. i own a mini schnauzer that is big enough for me

[Yogi]

Originally Posted by vetgroomer

Yogi, I'm really curious as to where you got your information regarding the development of pit bulls and their original purpose. Having bred Bull Terriers in the past, I've done a lot of research on the breed, and I can assure you the original purpose of the bull and terrier crosses was for fighting.

The Bull Dog traces back to the 13th century, when they were used for bull baiting. The massive head and shortened jaw allowed them to bite the bull and hold on, while still being able to breath.

When bull baiting was outlawed, "gentlemen" who preferred blood sports started crossing the existing bull dogs with a variety of terriers to produce dogs that were lighter in build and more agile. The various bull and terrier crosses evolved into the breeds we know today as the Staffordshire Bull Terrier, American Staffordshire Terrier, the American Pit Bull Terrier, and the Bull Terrier.

In the case of the Bull Terrier, the breed was created by James Hinks, who wanted an all white dog that was not only elegant in appearance, but game to fight. They were referred to as "The White Cavalier" and were not supposed to instigate a fight, but were required to be game enough to finish it, once it started.

None of the breeds that were created at the time were supposed to be man aggressive, though. In the old pit fights, the dog's were extensively handled during the fight. They didn't just toss two dogs in a pit and allow them to have-at-it. A man biter was not tolerated.

While it is true that the various bull and terrier breeds were also used for other purposes, including catch dogs for hunting wild boar, their original purpose was pit fighting.

The information came from reading about their origins over the years. I remember the human aggression issue was prevelant and would not be tolerated in the fighting versions thus many were put down for this and the breeding emphasized to work to eliminate this. I remember what you noted that the addition of other breeds were introduced for fighting as this was an English Hobby until approx 2 hundred years ago when it was banned. As for resources, I had a few books around but over the years I have given so many resources books to others when I no longer had need for them so I could not quote author or book to you. Sorry.
I was able to find this, it seems like this was one of the sources or should say reminds me of one of the sources I have used in the past. The information seem very familiar.
Pit Bull Breed History -- Pitbull

But the article you sited does indicate that the bull and terrier crosses were developed for pit fighting and became referred to as pit bull terriers "...bred specifically for combat with other dogs."

The original bull dogs were not created to fight other dogs, but the various pit bull breeds were. The original bull dogs looked nothing like our modern bull dog, either. They were higher on leg, much more athletic, and did bear a resemblance to the modern pit bull. In comparison to modern pit bulls, the original bull and terrier crosses were a mixed bag, depending on what terrier was used in the cross.

The original Bull Terriers didn't resemble our modern Bull Terrier either. They didn't develop the "down face" until 1917, with the birth of Lord Gladiator. If Mr. Hinks saw our modern Bull Terriers he probably wouldn't recognize them as being the same breed he worked so hard to develop. He probably wouldn't approve of the colored variety, either.

[Yogi]

Originally Posted by vetgroomer

But the article you sited does indicate that the bull and terrier crosses were developed for pit fighting and became referred to as pit bull terriers "...bred specifically for combat with other dogs."

The original bull dogs were not created to fight other dogs, but the various pit bull breeds were. The original bull dogs looked nothing like our modern bull dog, either. They were higher on leg, much more athletic, and did bear a resemblance to the modern pit bull. In comparison to modern pit bulls, the original bull and terrier crosses were a mixed bag, depending on what terrier was used in the cross.

The original Bull Terriers didn't resemble our modern Bull Terrier either. They didn't develop the "down face" until 1917, with the birth of Lord Gladiator. If Mr. Hinks saw our modern Bull Terriers he probably wouldn't recognize them as being the same breed he worked so hard to develop. He probably wouldn't approve of the colored variety, either.

I think in fact you could go back to many breeds of dogs and find that they do not necessarily resemble what the original breeder created. It is normal to say the least for Americans to take and re-create using what in a sense was fine the way it was for the sole egotistical reason of making it their own.
We re-wrote the book on probably hundreds of breeds over the last 200 years to the point that in many cases the breed has lost much of its purity based on the original breeders ideas not to mention the time he/she spent creating it. Perfect example is Dobermann's Pinscher. At the turn of the century another breeder decided the dog was not big enough so he took and included the Great Dane and English Greyhound. Granted in this case is was a German breeder but the concept carried over here in the beginning only to in a sense ruin the breed. I know in the Miniature Pinscher the gentleman here who basically pushed for the conformation now used failed along with the MPCA to seriously investigate the breed from its origins to determine its overall appearance. Other examples ie: Labs which is a common confusion as is with the Irish Setter. The American Rat terrier included using a Chihuahua after arriving here from England so to shorten the stance as if this would make for a better ratter after english breeders works so hard to create the original rat terrier using a Beagle and Whippet much as the Miniature Pinscher relied on the ratting abilities of the Dachshund and for speed, the Italian Greyhound. American breeders over the past near century have in a sense destroyed many breeds with their own ideas of what the breed should look like and act like when the breed was actually fine the way it was. So I agree that the Pit does not resemble what it was back then but what are we to do to stop this? In my case I have gone back to the Miniature Pinscher the true terrier and am working to create these again. They are a more physically built dog not as refined as bred here. They do not have the "hackney gait" since the Zwergpinscher never did. I have even convinced other long time breeder of Miniature Pinschers that this is in fact not a Toy breed and is a true terrier. In Europe and Germany it competes against the German Pinscher and the Schnauzers. This is where the dog belongs but unfortunately our North American bred dogs are so undersized and refined that they would not have a chance over there. So, do we continue to permit the US breed clubs to write of the standards or do we push them to honor the standards of the country of origin as they have far more experience and knowledge of their breeds than we do. Granted in the case of the Pit, and not being recognized by the AKC as of yet, I can understand where it would be difficult as the breed has gone through so many changes in the past 300 years, not just its physical appearance and size but the continuing adding of other breeds to ensure the breed does the job needed at that time in history. It is unfortunate but at this point in time until someone or a group of serious people actually sit down and review the breeds history extensively we will never know the exact truth about the breed but more so I would like to see enthusiasts actually come to the table with the concept and idea of once and for all creating a standard for today APBT. Though there is mention in several sites there has to be some true standard for all to follow which in turn may make it better in the long run for those seeking to get the breed recognized because I personally feel and always have that a properly bred dog to the right tempermant and to a specific set of standards has a very good chance for breed club recognition and with this I truly believe that with the proper petitioning this breed could be AKC recognized but if it continues to go through life as what many see as the ultimate mixed breed it will always carry the label as one thought all purebreds started out as mixed breeds. If nothing else, if they can properly find one or two that fits the bill as to size and tempermant that all can agree on then look into DNA testing. DNA testing does work on dogs so long as you use the proper labs. Once this is done than you would at least have a true breed that can be documented but as is, Mastiff, Bull Dog, Terrier, etc. no one really knows what comprises this breed only that it all actuality it is a mix of breeds that started with the Molassian line. All these were created based on what little info one can truly believe for the purpose of war as a guardian of soldiers to protection for farmers. After this was the creation of the variety of others that were bred with other breeds to create what was needed at the time. I have no doubt that the introduction of the terrier was needed in order for the dog to be able to handle the pit as the only species of dogs ever created by man for the sole purpose to kill is the terrier family of dogs. The original Bull Dog did not fit this classification and even noted in most documents never states it killed bulls but was used to control unruly ones. I have been around terriers for many years and no matter what breed if true to their original standards they are simply put tenacious on the hunt and even more so with the kill.
Unfortunately we are left holding the bag based on someones fool idea 300 years ago that found dog fighting to be sport. Now the question is, what is going to be done to eliminate this. I can only see serious attempts at breeding the dog correctly. I know it can be done as I have stated, the APBTs I have been around for many years have shown no aggression even around other dogs so I can only blame those breeding by not properly evaluating their sires and dams but instead to push pups into the market with no claim to responsibility as to their tempament. It has and always will be my belief that when we mix breeds we in fact risk not just creating a double up on inherit medical and health issues but the likelihood that we are creating a time bomb that could go off at any time. Do not get me wrong, I am a adamant supporter of rescues and have had many many mixed breeds over the years but at the same time when there is too much mix in the breed the end result can he as devastating as improper line or inbreeding. You just are too sure what you are getting.
I would support any real measure and attempt to take this breed out of the hands of irresponsible people in general not just breeders than sanction rules and laws to support specific breeding guidelines to return this breed to the stature it held in this country in the first half of the 20th century. A beloved family dog known to protect its family but at the same time not noted as a killer as the media has over played it. But then again, anyone can buy a gun so I guess this may never happen...it is unfortunate that there is a bad element out there that owns these dogs as it takes away from the good element that also own them. The media and public opinion though only seem to read and care about the bad elements such as Michael Vicks of the world.

It breaks my heart to know how people do this to the dogs. I can't even stand them doing it to roosters. How anybody can get pleasure from watching this I can't imagine. I think many people would actually love to see the gladiators in the Roman arenas kill each other. I think people that do this should be thrown in with a pack of hungry fighting dogs with their hands tied behind their backs.

[reeskujo]

Originally Posted by splinters

It breaks my heart to know how people do this to the dogs. I can't even stand them doing it to roosters. How anybody can get pleasure from watching this I can't imagine. I think many people would actually love to see the gladiators in the Roman arenas kill each other. I think people that do this should be thrown in with a pack of hungry fighting dogs with their hands tied behind their backs.

yes,and they should make sure the dogs are hungry and covered in bacon grease!

Definately!!!

[reeskujo]

Originally Posted by splinters

Definately!!!

There is something mentally wrong with people who can take pleasure in watching such a cruel and painful act of abuse!

It takes my breath away to think about something that is so loving and devoted having to live their life in complete terror. I can't stand it.:sad:

i have a pretty long list, but i'll only keep it to a few.

bulldogs- my friends owns one & after getting to personally know the breed, i really don't lke them. they smell, have bad teeth, eye lid problems, skin problems & breathing problems, not to mention that they cannot bredd or give birth without human intervention. a lot of people think that they are cute b/c of the wrinkles, but they are a dog that really takes a lot of care, more than most people realize.

border collies- this is a breed that i actually really admire, but they are SO smart & have to me stimulated constantly or they become a nuiscance. i don't think that i would have the intestinal fortitude to keep a dog like that.

golden retievers & labs - these are two breeds that are the perennial family favorites. once upon a time they were great breeds, but due to over breeding they have encountered a lot of problems with hips, eyes etc.. i've also never met one that was too smart.

I don't know how you can say they aren't too smart {retrievers & labs}. All I have met have been exceptional. Have you ever watched these dogs when they are working or training to work? You don't even have to speak to them, hand signals alone are all they need. Easiest dogs I have ever seen to house train.

Well, Yogi, there seems to be a debate going on with you and vetgroomer concerning the nature of the Pit. My feeling remains that he has an ingrained vicious nature. If you're looking for a dog to rip someone to pieces, he's your go-to dog.

Bulldogs are one of the breeds I'd never own. They drool.

[Yogi]

Originally Posted by wouldbedogowner

Well, Yogi, there seems to be a debate going on with you and vetgroomer concerning the nature of the Pit. My feeling remains that he has an ingrained vicious nature. If you're looking for a dog to rip someone to pieces, he's your go-to dog.

Bulldogs are one of the breeds I'd never own. They drool.

Funny, I don't see a debate regarding the nature of the dog nor do I see where vetgroomer is claiming the dog is vicious. From what I read from vetgroomer is she is asking where I received my information regarding the breeds history and what the breed was created for. Nothing in there implies that the dog is vicious to people unless you misread something and nothing in either of our posts implies that they are. If anything my post calls on issues with todays mixed breeds potentially being time bombs when improper breeds are crossed. This is no way specific to the Pit bull at the same time the majority of the attacks in fact were not Pits but mis identified breeds that resembled Pits. Just as stated before, you could not even ID the breed on the test and you think there are others here with that much more knowledge that they could id the dog? Nearly every person I have passed this on to over the past couple years have on average taken 4 tries which means that if they were the ones attacked, only 1 out of 4 chances the breed could have even been a Pit. Now add in that eyewitness are the worst witness in addition to a victim that is under so much duress they cannot remember the color of the one assaulting them and, well you some common sense....it does not take much for people in general to screw up since we have being doing it for millions of years.
As unfortunately for your opinion, it really does not count much since you have already acknowledged repeatedly with your posts here that you know very little of dogs, had you had any real knowledge you would never have inquired as to getting a dog that would never go in the house. That is a question that only one with truly no knowledge of dogs would ever ask. In addition, you have no experience first hand with APBT's and obviously will always fall back on reading media hype as opposed to first hand learning. I pray that you did not read a book on raising your children and offer them the benefit of a real education, the kind that is learned from experience not from a book as books are single dimension one sided view of any issue that does not encompass the senses to the fullest when learning from hands on experience.
So again, if is redundant for you to offer or for anyone to accept your opinion on this breed since simply you have a total of "0" experience therefore you have nothing to offer anyone. Now, when you quit being so frightened of this breed to go spend time with one (and it has nothing to do with whether you like this breed or not) that you can actually handle, pet and interact than feel free to at least say you have done that much you may contribute but otherwise what have you to offer in the way of non bias information, anything?
In addition, as I noted before the Cane Corso or Presa Canario is capable of doing far more damage than a Pit Bull. Again, note that the APBT even as vetgroomer noted, was created for pit fighting other dogs but not created as man aggressive. In the early years those dog were put down therefore the breeding of those temparments were removed from the breed. An inherit aggression toward animals is one thing I am quite familiar with as a long time breeder of terriers since this is the only group bred for the sole purpose. This in no way implies that they see people as animals and in fact do not. Everything from the Yorkshire Terrier to the Schnauzers are in this group and there willingness to attack and bite people is solely based on their mistreatment. Again, you abuse me I will strike out at you also. In the case of the dog their only defense is their willingness to nip or bite. Nip is deemed a warning, continues abuse is met with biting. The larger the mastiff breed the more physical damage can occur. If I was to breed a dog for the sole purpose of killing a man, the APBT would be down the list not the "go to dog" not by a mile. It may be time for you to actually start doing some research of your own on other breeds before mis speaking on one that you truly know nothing about. Keep in mind, it is not far fetched for a Bull Mastiff to reach upwards of nearly 200 lbs with the as much jaw pressure as any of the large breeds including the much physically smaller APBT. They can if abused be just as vicious as any APBT that has been abused. Now, if you think this dog will do less damage than you are gravely mistaken if anything it will make even shorter work of you than an APBT. Cane Corso's are extremely protective by nature as with Presa Canario thus in them is the natural instincts to protect so to assume they are not as capable when in fact they are more so able to do far more damage is again an understatement. The fact is from what I have read here on your post you are scared Sh****** of a breed you know nothing about and it is apparent to me that you are a follower and probably always have been. Too afraid to take the lead and obviously to frightened to to learn on your own. Instead looking for conformation form others like you that your beliefs are true and hope they are validated by these same people but in fact they are lacking the same knowledge as you and base all on no real first hand knowledge. I was viciously attacked by a GSD when I was a kid, I along with the kid that owned it teased it all the time in the back yard. Was the dog people aggressive, not really but it definitely was towards the kid and myself. Did it have reason, yes and to this day I learned from that experience which is why I have more faith in a dog than people....you are only endorsing my belief.
You remind me of my youngest when he was 17. I found out he was driving his best friends car. I asked why he would be driving it with no insurance, his response.....well I asked if you had insurance and he said yes so we agreed I could drive...I explained that the insurance he had was for him not for you and that you were insured only when driving my cars. He looked puzzled at this and assumed that since they both agreed that as the car was insured he was therefore insured it was ok to drive. Leave it to a 17 year old to ask someone with as little knowledge as himself for a truthful answer and you will hear only what you want to hear. Ask someone with actual knowledge and you may not hear this but what road do you take, the one that fits your belief so that you do not look stupid or the one that contradicts your belief and comes from those with more knowledge so in fact you learn and do not make the mistake again? It is said with age comes wisdom but more and more I am finding people who are aging that are not showing much sign of this. I guess my belief that people cannot be trusted overall is still intact. When man can learn from his mistakes is when he will advance to the next step but until that time it is like he is continually flunking the 5th grade over and over and over.

Yogi, I agree with you completely. At no time did I ever mention anything about Pit Bulls or any of the other bull and terrier breeds being man biters. In fact, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier is referred to as the "Nanny Dog" because they are so good and tolerant with children.

I've owned Bull Terriers. They were the best dogs with my kids. Even when my kids were babies. My youngest learned to walk by grabbing a hand full of Nan and being walked around the house. They could, and often did, reach into that huge mouth and take something out that they thought the dog shouldn't have, including meat.

When the kids had friends over, and squabbles erupted between two or more kids, Nan would push her way between the kids and separate them. She'd give them a look that said "You know, I'd really hate to have to bite one of you", but she NEVER actually offered to bite. In fact, she never came remotely close to biting a human in her 14 years of life. Not even in her last days, when she was sick and in a great deal of pain. When the vet slipped the needle into her vein to end her suffering, she licked his hand, as if to say "I know. It's for the best. Thank you for doing this for me."

I've worked in veterinary medicine and as a groomer for over 35 years. I've been bitten by many dogs, but never a Pit Bull. I'd rather work on any of the bull and terrier breeds than a Cocker, any day of the week.

Originally Posted by splinters

I don't know how you can say they aren't too smart {retrievers & labs}. All I have met have been exceptional. Have you ever watched these dogs when they are working or training to work? You don't even have to speak to them, hand signals alone are all they need. Easiest dogs I have ever seen to house train.

Ah, but there is a great difference between trainability and intelligence. Some of the dogs that are quick and easy to train really aren't all that bright. If you don't keep working them, they forget just as quickly as they learned.

On the other hand, some dogs that are highly intelligent can be real buggers to train. They think for themselves, and a lot of the time what they're thinking is 101 reasons why "I don't have to, and you can't make me."

I've had both types of dogs, and I've trained a lot of other people's dogs. The truly smart ones can be very challenging, because you have to have an answer for every one of the reasons why they think they don't have to.

[Yogi]

Originally Posted by vetgroomer

Ah, but there is a great difference between trainability and intelligence. Some of the dogs that are quick and easy to train really aren't all that bright. If you don't keep working them, they forget just as quickly as they learned.

On the other hand, some dogs that are highly intelligent can be real buggers to train. They think for themselves, and a lot of the time what they're thinking is 101 reasons why "I don't have to, and you can't make me."

I've had both types of dogs, and I've trained a lot of other people's dogs. The truly smart ones can be very challenging, because you have to have an answer for every one of the reasons why they think they don't have to.

As one who has raised and bred dogs for years I can attest that the Miniature Pinscher falls in the category "On the other hand". This was a breed created as a feral dog therefore it is not lacking in the area of intelligence, quite the contrary. A Miniature Pinscher to most comes across as stubborn but in fact it a very intelligent breed that just happens to posses a very stern independent streak and is very capable of free thinking.
They can be a challenge to teach. I joke with people who especially say they had taught their Pin to do this or that and just about the time they think they have it taught, the dog ignores them. I explain that the only reason the dog did what you told it to in the first place was because it was going to do it anyway. There are intelligent breeds and there are breeds that do well with training. Granted, it is not always breed related as in many cases it is the dog itself. Much of this though I have seen pertains to those breeds that are working breeds ie: sporting, herding etc. Keeping them busy in their field seems to be able for them to take in and absorb training better.
Where in the same breeds wherein the work is not always there, they seem to forget and need regular work. This is only my opinion as I have not had working breeds per say since the 70's with my Aussies.

[Yogi]

Originally Posted by vetgroomer

Yogi, I agree with you completely. At no time did I ever mention anything about Pit Bulls or any of the other bull and terrier breeds being man biters. In fact, the Staffordshire Bull Terrier is referred to as the "Nanny Dog" because they are so good and tolerant with children.

I've owned Bull Terriers. They were the best dogs with my kids. Even when my kids were babies. My youngest learned to walk by grabbing a hand full of Nan and being walked around the house. They could, and often did, reach into that huge mouth and take something out that they thought the dog shouldn't have, including meat.

When the kids had friends over, and squabbles erupted between two or more kids, Nan would push her way between the kids and separate them. She'd give them a look that said "You know, I'd really hate to have to bite one of you", but she NEVER actually offered to bite. In fact, she never came remotely close to biting a human in her 14 years of life. Not even in her last days, when she was sick and in a great deal of pain. When the vet slipped the needle into her vein to end her suffering, she licked his hand, as if to say "I know. It's for the best. Thank you for doing this for me."

I've worked in veterinary medicine and as a groomer for over 35 years. I've been bitten by many dogs, but never a Pit Bull. I'd rather work on any of the bull and terrier breeds than a Cocker, any day of the week.

same here regarding dogs with biting issues. I think many here are too young to realize that for many years the Cocker Spaniel in the US was responsible for more bites on a yearly basis than any other breed.
Even with the ban on APBT's in Denver, several Vets came out against it with one even noting that after some 20 years of practice and some hundred or so APBT's he had seen, not once was there one that was the least bit aggressive but he could name two other breeds that he always had problems with but would not acknowledge them in fear that the city council would next look to try and ban them also. I have been around APBT's for years and have not met one that was aggressive. I am not just a fond believer but one that is knowledgeable in the fact that it takes abuse or improper socializing for a dog to be aggressive. Whether defensive aggressive or aggressive. This will fall on the person raising the dog. It is no different than raising a child. You beat on one and rear it incorrectly, the odds are the child in adulthood will do the same to others. It is something that has been debated before but each time is proven out. We are products of our environment, which unfortunately is not always good. I have been fortunate to work with many dogs that I have taken in that were abused in one way or another and they have come around primarily by not forcing the issue with them. I grant them space and time and by doing so they find a medium where they are comfortable to live out their lives. I think simply it is letting a dog be a dog and by doing so less stress is put on them and makes for a happy dog prone to living longer. I have been doing this for over 40 years and on average my dogs raised from puppies have lived longer than the breed standards as well as even my cats. I do not force attention on them and in turn they come to me when they want it. Granted though with 16 dogs (which could be 19 by later today) and 13 cats, occasionally my lap is over flowing..
But it is well worth it. The new additions are 3 Purebred Papillons that a breeder friend wants me to take. She is getting out of breeding and has to 4 year old males and an 8 month old female. At least Whisper my 4 yr old female Pap will have some old friends. One of the males is her brother. Will see how this goes. I have a friend who loves this breed and has room for a couple if it is too much for me to handle at this time. Even healthy dogs can run up a vet bill and more of a bill when taking in those from others that come with health issues. Recent $500 for mass cell removal on hind leg of one of the Pins. Another came to me with possible liver issues. I almost lost her couple weeks ago but appears I have more faith than the vet tech who suggested have a quality of life conversation when she brought her out to me than was stupid enough to tell me she would not last the weekend. Needless to say, she did and that was 2 weeks ago and she has since gained 2.5 lbs. I let my vet know that he needs to have a conversation with the tech and explain how to approach these issues better with people as opposed to just blurting it out. In addition to explain who I was and that I have a better sense of my dogs issues and potential recovery especially since she acknowledged she had not even read the chart or work up on the dog. It sounds stupid to some, spending so much money that others think I should not just for dogs that were not even mine in the first place but for me, hell why not. I personally cant think of anything better to spend it on. Besides, I get a kick out of seeing these guys get better and watching their improvement, especially when told they do not have much time left.

Originally Posted by Yogi;53946I

personally cant think of anything better to spend it on.

You can't? How about spending it on a female of the 2-legged variety?

[Yogi]

Originally Posted by wouldbedogowner

You can't? How about spending it on a female of the 2-legged variety?

Why should I?

Roflmbo!!