Advice please re RB dogs on loose

DamagedTrax

Gumbi wrote: »

They haven't been socialised correctly. I can easily counter your anecdote with my own; my cousin have 2 pitbulls, both of whom are absolutely great with all people and dogs.

they have been socialised. on lead and muzzle... but you show me your cousins 2 pitbull's pedigrees and i guarantee they come from VERY different bloodlines from the dogs im takling about.

take a look on 'irelands pit bull terrier association'. you'll find some of the most knowledgeable pitbull owners and have a chat with them as to what the breed is like with other dogs.

DamagedTrax

Gumbi wrote: »

You realise the logical implication of this post is that the breeder/owner, not the dog is the problem, which is what people here have been trying to say.

i never once said that people arent the problem. im just saying being anti-BSL is all well and good, it is an ill thought out law that demonises innocent dogs and fails to address the real problems (ie: irresponsible ownership).. BUT certain RB dogs should be considered for what they. as beautiful as they are and as much as i love them, it doesnt change the fact that they like to fight and as a responsible owner action should be taken to stop that happening.

and this goes back to the earlier discussion about akita, i dont think they should be roaming around a neighbour hood. they are a beauitful breed but because of their original breed purpose, are known for aggression just like pits.

Whispered

DamagedTrax wrote: »

that believe thats how pitbulls should be bred and having the agression bred out of them is wrong. its down to responsible owners to find another outlet for all that energy, such as weightpull and agility.

I think it's irresponsible to breed for aggression. If they are truly DA then weightpull and agility will not change the fact they are aggressive. It's horrible to see the stress a dog who is truly DA goes through when faced with another dog. Really horrific.



Anyway, I'm off to work now. Lovely day for it

(pitbulls and rotties and staffies - oh my!)

EDIT: Sorry yes, the akita, of course shouldn't be roaming and people faced with such a problem should contact the warden.

ISDW

I can see where DamagedTrax is coming from, as I do believe that breeds can have inherent traits, that no amount of socialising, training etc can eradicate.

speaking from what I know, siberian huskies, should never be exercised in an unenclosed area off lead, and shouldn't be left alone with small furries. Some would argue that if a sibe is brought up from a pup and trained, that those traits can be overcome, but there is too much evidence for me not to believe that is not the case in the majority of the breed, no matter how much hard work is put into them.

DamagedTrax

Whispered wrote: »

I think it's irresponsible to breed for aggression.

well heres the kicker on this one. as thats what the breed was originally bred for it is also where it gets it's 2nd to none reputation with children. the best pitbulls could fight in the ring but would never turn into a man-biter. so assuming that we all agree that only the best of the breeds should be bred from, what choice is there but to breed from generations of fighting dogs with known pedigree.

the other option is to bring in untested blood and possibly affect the breed's stability with humans. give me a DA pitbull over a HA pitbull anyday!

i can bet that a high majority of the 'pitbull attack' stories we hear of are from badly bred pits or pit Xs. a well bred stable pit just doesnt do that.

If they are truly DA then weightpull and agility will not change the fact they are aggressive

no it wont. but it will put their focus and energy onto something else. remember they are a working breed and need that frustration release.

lrushe

Damagedtrax I can kinda see where you're coming from as I hate the 'dumbing down' of more strong personality breed dogs like Rotties, GSD etc.
When people say these dogs are everyone's friend I always think to myself that while that's nice in theory that is not how the breed should be. However that said stand offishness is totally different to agression and to breed for agression regardless of the the supposed pay off is wrong and no breed be them Pits or anything else should be bred with this criteria in mind.

DamagedTrax

lrushe wrote: »

Damagedtrax I can kinda see where you're coming from as I hate the 'dumbing down' of more strong personality breed dogs like Rotties, GSD etc.
When people say these dogs are everyone's friend I always think to myself that while that's nice in theory that is not how the breed should be. However that said stand offishness is totally different to agression and to breed for agression regardless of the the supposed pay off is wrong and no breed be them Pits or anything else should be bred with this criteria in mind.

im not saying to breed for aggression. im saying that a high % of well bred pits have a tendancy towards dog aggression because of their historical make-up.

Whispered

Whispered wrote: »

I love to meet an akita when out, or any dog for that matter. I also, regularly walk with all manner of dogs from bull mastiffs to westies and I very very rarely meet anyone who has any fear which you seem to think your akita deserves.

I really don't see what you're trying to get across and may have misunderstood your point. I can imagine you with your dog shouting "Don't approach it's, it's, IT'S AN AKITA :eek:" :P

Not at all, you've missed my point altogether.

I originally said the following

the LAST thing I'd ever want to encounter in a dark park is someone else's Akita off the leash roaming around without a muzzle.

As I said, if I saw an Akita in a dark park, roaming off the leash without a muzzle on, I'd immediately think that their owner is irresponsible because their dog is off the leash where there are other people around.

No need to be dramatic about it. I'm in the right here so please feel free to patronise me.

lrushe

DamagedTrax wrote: »

im not saying to breed for aggression. im saying that a high % of well bred pits have a tendancy towards dog aggression because of their historical make-up.

Are the owners of these agressive Pits s/neutering these dogs or are they continuing to breed from them knowing that the agression can be passed on?

DamagedTrax

the good examples are being bred from, the rest neutered. dog aggression is something all pitbull owners should be aware of and be prepared to deal with, it's part of the breed. its not a reason to not breed IMO.

if you want a non-aggressive well bred pitbull then an amstaff is the way to go. they're basically a non-aggressive pitbull.

pitbull, show pitbull & amstaff

lrushe

DamagedTrax wrote: »

if you want a non-aggressive well bred pitbull then an amstaff is the way to go. they're basically a non-aggressive pitbull.

A non-agressive well bred pitbull is what EVERYONE should want imo

68Murph68

To get back to the OP (ignoring the rights and wrongs of the actual current law)

First off, are you 100% sure that the dogs are RBs as opposed to cross-breeds?

If you get no joy from the owner, photo evidence would be very valuable in taking the matter further. A couple of decent quick pics with a camera phone would strengthen your case immensely. Otherwise you are in a "he said, she said" situation where the owner can deny everything and it makes it much harder for officialdom to proceed.

Also if you are approaching the authorities, you should speak to your neighbours. The way officialdom works in Ireland more notice is taken of a group of people compared to one person complaining. I'm sure your elderly neighbour would have no problem in providing moral support if they are actually terrified.

DamagedTrax

lrushe wrote: »

A non-agressive well bred pitbull is what EVERYONE should want imo

each to their own. a lot of pitbull owners would rather go with dogs from proven bloodlines and deal with aggression if it arises. different strokes for different folks.

as i said earlier, my staffie goes nuts at wild life or small furries. i wouldnt want to change that in her. i just take precautions so as she doesnt hurt anything or herself.

Whispered

DamagedTrax wrote: »

no it wont. but it will put their focus and energy onto something else. remember they are a working breed and need that frustration release.

Of course (thanks for that though). The point I am making is that a DA dog suffers much higher levels of stress than a dog who is not, you see it yourself at those shows. So why breed a dog who is likely to have to suffer high levels of stress?

DamagedTrax wrote: »

well heres the kicker on this one. as thats what the breed was originally bred for it is also where it gets it's 2nd to none reputation with children. the best pitbulls could fight in the ring but would never turn into a man-biter. so assuming that we all agree that only the best of the breeds should be bred from, what choice is there but to breed from generations of fighting dogs with known pedigree.

I believe that this has been slightly proven wrong by your own experiences with staffies though? A staffy, with similar backgrounds to pits and similar traits are also known to be fantastic with people. Your own girl is a great example of a dog who is neither DA or HA right? Can't the same be done with pits? I think responsible breeding could bring about a pit and or staffy who is tenacious, loyal, brave etc all the traits we love our staffies for, but tone down the aggression.

The levels of stress and frustration in an aggressive dog would be something most dog lovers would like to avoid.

Deleted User wrote: »

I originally said the following

As I said, if I saw an Akita in a dark park, roaming off the leash without a muzzle on, I'd immediately think that their owner is irresponsible because their dog is off the leash where there are other people around.

The post I commented on was quoted in full.

Deleted User wrote: »

No need to be dramatic about it. I'm in the right here so please feel free to patronise me.

I'm hardly the one being dramatic.

they're not the sort of dogs you'd approach or want to meet unless you know them very well. That's coming from someone who has only ever had good experiences with the breed.

I would have thought the might point to the fact I was joking, but please feel free to take offence anyway.

Whispered

Whispered wrote: »

The post I commented on was quoted in full.

Well done...but that doesn't negate what I said earlier on in the discussion.

DamagedTrax

The point I am making is that a DA dog suffers much higher levels of stress than a dog who is not, you see it yourself at those shows. So why breed a dog who is likely to have to suffer high levels of stress?

because thats how the breed has been for hundreds of years. some people want to preserve that and some (see my answer on next quote) dont.

I believe that this has been slightly proven wrong by your own experiences with staffies though? A staffy, with similar backgrounds to pits and similar traits are also known to be fantastic with people. Your own girl is a great example of a dog who is neither DA or HA right? Can't the same be done with pits? I think responsible breeding could bring about a pit and or staffy who is tenacious, loyal, brave etc all the traits we love our staffies for, but tone down the aggression.

it already has been done. the amstaff is a breed evolved of selective breeding on the pitbull. it is only considered a breed in its own right after the 70's. trace amstaff lines back far enough and you'll be in fighting dog territory but nowadays they are more akin to the staffy than the pit.

IMO there's room in the world for all types of pitbull, my original point being that owners just need to be aware and respect whats on the end of the lead they're holding. running around the street isnt the place for these dogs, they may be the most docile pitbull in the world but what if another dog starts some trouble with them and they react? unfortunatly thats gonna end badly for the other dog and the pitbull is of course then demonized yet again as a monster.

Whispered

DamagedTrax wrote: »

because thats how the breed has been for hundreds of years. some people want to preserve that and some (see my answer on next quote) dont.

I suppose I look at DA almost as a sickness, this may not be very accurate I understand but there are similarities. DA is something which causes a dog stress, causes the owner stress, means the dog can't often partake in usual doggy activities such as meeting other dogs, playing with other dogs, snuggling with other dogs etc and severely limits what the dog can and can't safely do.

There are many physical traits which some breeds have been bred for which I'm sure you'd like to see done away with like the super short muzzles on some breeds causing breathing issues, or the teeny head on a CKC which can add to the causes of syringomyelia. I just see aggression as a similar thing. A breed trait which should be done away with for the good of the breed.

DamagedTrax wrote: »

IMO there's room in the world for all types of pitbull, my original point being that owners just need to be aware and respect whats on the end of the lead they're holding. running around the street isnt the place for these dogs, they may be the most docile pitbull in the world but what if another dog starts some trouble with them and they react? unfortunatly thats gonna end badly for the other dog and the pitbull is of course then demonized yet again as a monster.

Of course a pitbull, or any dog shouldn't be roaming. The danger is more for some breeds than others and owners usually are aware of that. It is unfair that the pb is demonized as a monster when there are those who knowingly breed aggressive dogs.

DamagedTrax

Whispered wrote: »

It is unfair that the pb is demonized as a monster when there are those who knowingly breed aggressive dogs.

but then we're back to the same arguement again. a high % the best dogs in the breed can be aggressive, so do we breed below par dogs just so that they're less aggro? or do we breed the best possible dog and deal with whatever aggro is already in the blood?

i can tell you now which one will and which one will never happen. a healthy dog will always win out.

and remember these dogs have been bred like this for a long long time, its not just a case of suddenly switching an entire breed's breeding program! especially as most that breed game dogs arent in the slightest bit interested in breeding non-aggresive dogs. they breed game pitbulls because thats what they want to breed. its not by accident.

Whispered

DamagedTrax wrote: »

and remember these dogs have been bred like this for a long long time, its not just a case of suddenly switching an entire breed's breeding program! especially as most that breed game dogs arent in the slightest bit interested in breeding non-aggresive dogs. they breed game pitbulls because thats what they want to breed. its not by accident.

There doesn't need to be a sudden switch, indeed it would be impossible to suddenly switch any breed trait. How many generations of careful breeding would you think it would take to significantly reduce the aggression in a line of dogs?

And no it's not by accident. Do you think that means it's right for people to continue breeding dogs which they know will be aggressive? I would wonder at the motivation behind people who purposefully breed "game" dogs.

DamagedTrax

There doesn't need to be a sudden switch, indeed it would be impossible to suddenly switch any breed trait. How many generations of careful breeding would you think it would take to significantly reduce the aggression in a line of dogs?

usually takes 5 generations for a line of dogs they say, i think? but for a full breed, who knows?

And no it's not by accident. Do you think that means it's right for people to continue breeding dogs which they know will be aggressive? I would wonder at the motivation behind people who purposefully breed "game" dogs.

personally i think it is ok. they're working dogs, they're highly driven and its a sight to behold when they start pulling 4/5000lbs at a weight pull. what i find unnacceptable is the people who get them as a pet and dont work them hard. the same way i feel about people who get husky/mal type dogs as a fashion accessory.. get a bleedin handbag or some shoes instead

if you want a non-aggressive pet pitbull get a show bred dog.. leave the hardcore dogs to the people that understand the needs of the breed and are willing to provide to those needs.

lrushe

DamagedTrax wrote: »

personally i think it is ok. they're working dogs, they're highly driven and its a sight to behold when they start pulling 4/5000lbs at a weight pull.

I think you're mistaking agression for a high work drive as though you can't have one without the other.
I've known some brillant working dogs ( & yes they are not for the novice dog owner ) with zero agression. I think it's a lazy handler who would rely on agression to improve a dogs' working ability.
Not to mention the morals of someone who would knowingly breed a dog who could turn out to be agressive & send it out into God only knows whos hands. It'd be like giving a baby a gun!

DamagedTrax

drive can be strongly fueled by aggression.

actually i just want to clear up something here, im begginning to think my use of the word aggression is misplaced. gameness is a better description. and gameness, being a refusal to quit, is very much linked to drive.

most pitbull breeders aim for gameness.

DamagedTrax

lrushe wrote: »

Not to mention the morals of someone who would knowingly breed a dog who could turn out to be agressive & send it out into God only knows whos hands. It'd be like giving a baby a gun!

well thats every pitbull breeder out there then. cause everyone of them have the potential to be aggressive and anyone that spends time around the dogs knows that.

im sorry if the reality of them is offensive to you but im not gonna be a bleeding heart about them. i love them and ill always be around them but they can be a handful around other dogs no matter how well trained/socialised and (in my opinion) to think otherwise is blinkered.