Semi graphic bite photos.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gio

Simply annoying and off topic. Though a semi recovery from early.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gio

I didn't say ALL were culled but it is not misinformation that it occurred.

---

You said;

" By the way pit bulls are typically more difficult to protection train due to the fact that in their creation dogs that bit their handlers or others were culled or never used for breeding."

The implication of "in their creation dogs that bit were culled or never used for breeding" is "ALL". That is simply what I am correcting. Dogmen didn't select against biting. They selected for the best fighters. The best fighters were the ones that focused on the job at hand and didn't redirect to handlers while in the pit. That is very very different then breeders selecting specifically for docility.

Quote:

---

Have you titled a dog in French Ring, Mondio Ring, PSA or anything protection relate? Have you worked with dogs in law enforcement?

---

Yes. I have. IPO. See post #4 of this thread. Working dogs is also part of my livelihood - scent detection in the private sector.

Quote:

---

I never said any old bloke should own one. I did however say legislation was ineffective and really a violation of rights.

---

Which I agree with. I am against BSL. Which I have previously stated.

Quote:

---

Your first post on this said you wished you hand't supported the breed, at least that's what I got from it.

---

Um no. You must have me confused with someone else. My first post on this thread was commiserating because my boyfriend was afraid of getting bit by my 300g ball but has no issues with the idea of getting bit by our shepherds. He's even stated he'd rather work the dogs without a suit then handle my snappy 300g snake. My second post was disagreeing with someone who brought up labs and weight, saying I'd rather deal with an 80 lb constrictor than an 80 lb fila. The rest of my posts were simply an conversation disagreeing with you about pit bull breed history.


I have repeatedly emphasized my love for the breed. I lived with several. Over the last 20 ish years - 4 of my personal dogs were pits or pit mixes. My heart dog was a little brindle boy who's ashes are 2 feet away from me with a picture of his goofy smiling face as we speak. I fostered 19. Of those fosters I put CGCs on 17 of them. To make them more adoptable. Because they were pits. Some of them had baggage. 2 were emaciated by the time they got to me. I cooked for them daily. A few were heartworm positive. I climbed into their crates with them since they needed to be exercise restricted but I didn't want them to be lonely, sat cramped up for a few hours every day reading with a pit on my lap. One was doused in gasoline and set on fire. I changed his bandages daily. Another was kept in such a small crate and was so malnourished while growing, she had had musco-skeletal disorders the dog version of rickets. I carried her in my arms every day until she was strong enough for physical therapy. I have even been a volunteer and helped to organize weight pull contests in inner cities as an alternative to dog fighting. Throwing out my back tossing bags of kibble or cinder blocks around.

The only reason I do not have a pit now is the youngest shepherd (who just received is BH this month and will be going for his IPO I in march) is a jerk with other dogs and I don't have the energy for the rotating crate game or micro managing interactions anymore so I won't be taking on a dog aggressive breed until this guy's senior years or until he's crossed the bridge. Maybe by that time I might switch to mini bull terriers instead of an APBT. Very similar personalities but I'll be an old git by then and might want a smaller dog.

I have never said and never will say "I wish I hadn't supported pit bulls."

Quote:

---

I have a wonderful pit rescue that my kids are in love with. I never strayed from responsible ownership.

---

Pits can be great family dogs - when paired with a dog savvy owner who understands and accepts their genetics. Sadly the vast majority of pit owners do not and that is why the breed that I love ends up topping the statistic charts in terms of fatalities. Too many pit bull advocates try to dismiss the claims of those statistics and that is not helpful to preservation of the breed :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by voodoolamb

You said;

" By the way pit bulls are typically more difficult to protection train due to the fact that in their creation dogs that bit their handlers or others were culled or never used for breeding."

The implication of "in their creation dogs that bit were culled or never used for breeding" is "ALL". That is simply what I am correcting. Dogmen didn't select against biting. They selected for the best fighters. The best fighters were the ones that focused on the job at hand and didn't redirect to handlers while in the pit. That is very very different then breeders selecting specifically for docility.




Yes. I have. IPO. See post #4 of this thread. Working dogs is also part of my livelihood - scent detection in the private sector.


Which I agree with. I am against BSL. Which I have previously stated.



Um no. You must have me confused with someone else. My first post on this thread was commiserating because my boyfriend was afraid of getting bit by my 300g ball but has no issues with the idea of getting bit by our shepherds. He's even stated he'd rather work the dogs without a suit then handle my snappy 300g snake. My second post was disagreeing with someone who brought up labs and weight, saying I'd rather deal with an 80 lb constrictor than an 80 lb fila. The rest of my posts were simply an conversation disagreeing with you about pit bull breed history.


I have repeatedly emphasized my love for the breed. I lived with several. Over the last 20 ish years - 4 of my personal dogs were pits or pit mixes. My heart dog was a little brindle boy who's ashes are 2 feet away from me with a picture of his goofy smiling face as we speak. I fostered 19. Of those fosters I put CGCs on 17 of them. To make them more adoptable. Because they were pits. Some of them had baggage. 2 were emaciated by the time they got to me. I cooked for them daily. A few were heartworm positive. I climbed into their crates with them since they needed to be exercise restricted but I didn't want them to be lonely, sat cramped up for a few hours every day reading with a pit on my lap. One was doused in gasoline and set on fire. I changed his bandages daily. Another was kept in such a small crate and was so malnourished while growing, she had had musco-skeletal disorders the dog version of rickets. I carried her in my arms every day until she was strong enough for physical therapy. I have even been a volunteer and helped to organize weight pull contests in inner cities as an alternative to dog fighting. Throwing out my back tossing bags of kibble or cinder blocks around.

The only reason I do not have a pit now is the youngest shepherd (who just received is BH this month and will be going for his IPO I in march) is a jerk with other dogs and I don't have the energy for the rotating crate game or micro managing interactions anymore so I won't be taking on a dog aggressive breed until this guy's senior years or until he's crossed the bridge. Maybe by that time I might switch to mini bull terriers instead of an APBT. Very similar personalities but I'll be an old git by then and might want a smaller dog.

I have never said and never will say "I wish I hadn't supported pit bulls."



Pits can be great family dogs - when paired with a dog savvy owner who understands and accepts their genetics. Sadly the vast majority of pit owners do not and that is why the breed that I love ends up topping the statistic charts in terms of fatalities. Too many pit bull advocates try to dismiss the claims of those statistics and that is not helpful to preservation of the breed :(

---

Mostly agree but they did cull and it was not a secret. They ARE not typically good P/P trial dogs.

Great IPO is a standard test for the breed it was designed for.

The stats are flawed as mentioned by Pit On The Prowl earlier.

I don't have further time for this but I see you have more of a liking for them than I thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by voodoolamb

You said;

" By the way pit bulls are typically more difficult to protection train due to the fact that in their creation dogs that bit their handlers or others were culled or never used for breeding."

The implication of "in their creation dogs that bit were culled or never used for breeding" is "ALL". That is simply what I am correcting. Dogmen didn't select against biting. They selected for the best fighters. The best fighters were the ones that focused on the job at hand and didn't redirect to handlers while in the pit. That is very very different then breeders selecting specifically for docility.




Yes. I have. IPO. See post #4 of this thread. Working dogs is also part of my livelihood - scent detection in the private sector.


Which I agree with. I am against BSL. Which I have previously stated.



Um no. You must have me confused with someone else. My first post on this thread was commiserating because my boyfriend was afraid of getting bit by my 300g ball but has no issues with the idea of getting bit by our shepherds. He's even stated he'd rather work the dogs without a suit then handle my snappy 300g snake. My second post was disagreeing with someone who brought up labs and weight, saying I'd rather deal with an 80 lb constrictor than an 80 lb fila. The rest of my posts were simply an conversation disagreeing with you about pit bull breed history.


I have repeatedly emphasized my love for the breed. I lived with several. Over the last 20 ish years - 4 of my personal dogs were pits or pit mixes. My heart dog was a little brindle boy who's ashes are 2 feet away from me with a picture of his goofy smiling face as we speak. I fostered 19. Of those fosters I put CGCs on 17 of them. To make them more adoptable. Because they were pits. Some of them had baggage. 2 were emaciated by the time they got to me. I cooked for them daily. A few were heartworm positive. I climbed into their crates with them since they needed to be exercise restricted but I didn't want them to be lonely, sat cramped up for a few hours every day reading with a pit on my lap. One was doused in gasoline and set on fire. I changed his bandages daily. Another was kept in such a small crate and was so malnourished while growing, she had had musco-skeletal disorders the dog version of rickets. I carried her in my arms every day until she was strong enough for physical therapy. I have even been a volunteer and helped to organize weight pull contests in inner cities as an alternative to dog fighting. Throwing out my back tossing bags of kibble or cinder blocks around.

The only reason I do not have a pit now is the youngest shepherd (who just received is BH this month and will be going for his IPO I in march) is a jerk with other dogs and I don't have the energy for the rotating crate game or micro managing interactions anymore so I won't be taking on a dog aggressive breed until this guy's senior years or until he's crossed the bridge. Maybe by that time I might switch to mini bull terriers instead of an APBT. Very similar personalities but I'll be an old git by then and might want a smaller dog.

I have never said and never will say "I wish I hadn't supported pit bulls."



Pits can be great family dogs - when paired with a dog savvy owner who understands and accepts their genetics. Sadly the vast majority of pit owners do not and that is why the breed that I love ends up topping the statistic charts in terms of fatalities. Too many pit bull advocates try to dismiss the claims of those statistics and that is not helpful to preservation of the breed :(

---

I owe you a bit of an apology. I did have you mixed up with somebody else.

Too much BS in this thread.

I will give you the information WHICH IS CORRECT about the culling and not passing man aggressive tendencies on.

It is from Richard F. Stratton's THE TRUTH ABOUT THE AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER.

I can't get into page specifics at this time but there IS NO DOUBT that the earliest and best game dogs were man friendly and desired.

Handlers separating pit dogs didn't want the dogs to turn on them.

It is well documented and makes complete sense. It also was what led to the general happy, go lucky attitude of the breed early on.

If needed I'll provide a page number as well when I have time. I know my stuff and really should not have to prove anything here in a snake post. However I thought you were a different poster and was confused since the post went off track.

I will also find it in the Colby book, and probably THE WORLD OF FIGHTING DOGS and other media I have.

The simple fact that I have done field work with them and been with others who have as well is also very telling.



TRUE game bred pits were family dogs for the most part and EXTREMELY man friendly.

Wanna be dog men have ruined the breed, destroyed their reputation and created a completely different animal which is now crucified by the media.

Staying on this tangent... Pits have always come across to me as just big loyal lovable dummies with huge hearts and an intense need to please.

I doubt the animal is that much different. Just that people used and abused the "practically undying loyalty" aspect to train the empty headed muscle machines to be aggressive/defensive.

That is just how I view it. Nothing but personal experience with many members of the breed, and none professional.


Herp Derp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gio

I owe you a bit of an apology. I did have you mixed up with somebody else.

Too much BS in this thread.

I will give you the information WHICH IS CORRECT about the culling and not passing man aggressive tendencies on.

It is from Richard F. Stratton's THE TRUTH ABOUT THE AMERICAN PIT BULL TERRIER.

I can't get into page specifics at this time but there IS NO DOUBT that the earliest and best game dogs were man friendly and desired.

Handlers separating pit dogs didn't want the dogs to turn on them.

It is well documented and makes complete sense. It also was what led to the general happy, go lucky attitude of the breed early on.

If needed I'll provide a page number as well when I have time. I know my stuff and really should not have to prove anything here in a snake post. However I thought you were a different poster and was confused since the post went off track.

I will also find it in the Colby book, and probably THE WORLD OF FIGHTING DOGS and other media I have.

The simple fact that I have done field work with them and been with others who have as well is also very telling.



TRUE game bred pits were family dogs for the most part and EXTREMELY man friendly.

Wanna be dog men have ruined the breed, destroyed their reputation and created a completely different animal which is now crucified by the media.

---

If you get the time I would be interested - I still have my copy of Colby's book. I don't think I have ever read Stratton's though.

I think this is one of those mythos where the truth lies somewhere in the middle. My opinion is based on match reports, interviews with dog men, old gazette articles and pedigree research. Heck even old classifieds from the early 1900s touting the bull terriers as watch dogs.

I am content to let this be an agree to disagree thing.

Believe it or not we are 100% on the same side. Both pit bull loving people that wants what is best for the breed. We might disagree with what that is exactly and we definitely disagree on breeding practices 50 - 100 years ago but at heart are both fanciers of the dogs and it sounds like we've both had pretty amazing ones in our lives.

I've owned game bred pits - i once had to use a break stick on a boy while playing with a tether pole. He landed on a baby copper head and got bit. Latched onto that tug and would not let go. (How's that for gameness?!) Had to break him off to take him to the emergency vet. Silly goose of a dog. He was an amazing and sweet boy. Actually he saved my life once. Fell asleep with my TV on and it caught fire! :O He woke me up.

It's the same with snakes (getting back on topic!). Not every snake is right for every snake owner and some complete *insert BP-net inappropriate mean word here* get ones they are in no way, shape or form capable of owning then a tragedy happens... and it ruins it for those of us who are responsible.

Which is probably about 85% of the reason I an a total misanthrope :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KingWheatley

Staying on this tangent... Pits have always come across to me as just big loyal lovable dummies with huge hearts and an intense need to please.

I doubt the animal is that much different. Just that people used and abused the "practically undying loyalty" aspect to train the empty headed muscle machines to be aggressive/defensive.

That is just how I view it. Nothing but personal experience with many members of the breed, and none professional.


Herp Derp

---

You can't really train a non aggressive dog to be aggressive. There is a HUGE genetic component.

If a dog has the drives to be aggressive you can train it to use its aggression at your discretion.

But there is a reason that labradors aren't used as patrol dogs and why poodles were never used in blood sports.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by voodoolamb

You can't really train a non aggressive dog to be aggressive. There is a HUGE genetic component.

If a dog has the drives to be aggressive you can train it to use its aggression at your discretion.

But there is a reason that labradors aren't used as patrol dogs and why poodles were never used in blood sports.

---

Actually... Labs are used as patrol dogs.

My ex's department has two Labs, one German shepherd, and one other dog who I don't remember the breed of.

Also Lexington Metro Police Department just got a new Chocolate Lab as a K-9.

Herp Derp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KingWheatley

Actually... Labs are used as patrol dogs.

My ex's department has two Labs, one German shepherd, and one other dog who I don't remember the breed of.

Also Lexington Metro Police Department just got a new Chocolate Lab as a K-9.

Herp Derp

---

No they are not. Labs are used as single purpose detection dogs in K9 units. NOT for patrol work aka bite work.

Single purpose dogs are cheaper and less of a liability which us why some police departments have them. Labs being hunting dogs have a great sense of smell and good prey/ball drive so they make swell detection K9s.

The patrol dogs are always of a breed that was selected to be civil (meaning it has a willingness to bite a person). Shepherds, malinois, and Dutch shepherds being most common. A handful of other herding and guardian breeds can be found but they are pretty rare.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by voodoolamb

No they are not. Labs are used as single purpose detection dogs in K9 units. NOT for patrol work aka bite work.

Single purpose dogs are cheaper and less of a liability which us why some police departments have them. Labs being hunting dogs have a great sense of smell and good prey/ball drive so they make swell detection K9s.

The patrol dogs are always of a breed that was selected to be civil (meaning it has a willingness to bite a person). Shepherds, malinois, and Dutch shepherds being most common. A handful of other herding and guardian breeds can be found but they are pretty rare.

---

"Patrol dogs." These dogs do go on patrol. But both departments do not have what they would call "bite dogs."

Now, dog breeder/selling may have different lingo, however I am VERY familiar with police especially around here.

Terms are as follows:

"Bite dog" a take down dog. Lexington Metro to my knowledge has none. UKPD absolutely has none. They are too much of a liability to the college.

"Patrol dog" a dog who is making rounds with their handler. Usually going to be a lab or "friendly breed." Especially at U.K. They are ALL about appearances, and not looking too intimidating, so the German Shepherd is never out as a patrol dog.

Then the usual sniffer and terms associated with the different sniffing talents.


Herp Derp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KingWheatley

"Patrol dogs." These dogs do go on patrol. But both departments do not have what they would call "bite dogs."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KingWheatley

Now, dog breeder/selling may have different lingo, however I am VERY familiar with police especially around here.

Terms are as follows:

"Bite dog" a take down dog. Lexington Metro to my knowledge has none. UKPD absolutely has none. They are too much of a liability to the college.

"Patrol dog" a dog who is making rounds with their handler. Usually going to be a lab or "friendly breed." Especially at U.K. They are ALL about appearances, and not looking too intimidating, so the German Shepherd is never out as a patrol dog.

Then the usual sniffer and terms associated with the different sniffing talents.


Herp Derp

---

You must live in an outlier area. That is not the typical lingo even amongst police departments. Perhaps it is used colloquially at that department to refer to any police dog.

"Patrol Dog" is the name of a certification. Check out the United State's Police K9 Association's (A large national organization which many police departments use to certify their teams) certification requirements:

http://www.uspcak9.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/PATROL-DOG-I-CERTIFICATION-RULES-2016.pdf

As you can see the "Patrol Dog" certification includes a section on criminal apprehension aka bite work. The other North American k9 associations use similar terminology. Detection dogs have their own certifications that don't use that terminology.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by voodoolamb

You must live in an outlier area. That is not the typical lingo even amongst police departments. Perhaps it is used colloquially at that department to refer to any police dog.

"Patrol Dog" is the name of a certification. Check out the United State's Police K9 Association's (A large national organization which many police departments use to certify their teams) certification requirements:

http://www.uspcak9.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/PATROL-DOG-I-CERTIFICATION-RULES-2016.pdf

As you can see the "Patrol Dog" certification includes a section on criminal apprehension aka bite work. The other North American k9 associations use similar terminology. Detection dogs have their own certifications that don't use that terminology.

---

That makes sense. Perhaps instead of referring to the certification, they are simply referring to what they are actively assigned to. Like one officer that's assigned to the Paddy Wagon wouldn't be called a "patrol officer" but "garbage pick up...." (a joke, of course)


Herp Derp

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by voodoolamb

If you get the time I would be interested - I still have my copy of Colby's book. I don't think I have ever read Stratton's though.

I think this is one of those mythos where the truth lies somewhere in the middle. My opinion is based on match reports, interviews with dog men, old gazette articles and pedigree research. Heck even old classifieds from the early 1900s touting the bull terriers as watch dogs.

I am content to let this be an agree to disagree thing.

Believe it or not we are 100% on the same side. Both pit bull loving people that wants what is best for the breed. We might disagree with what that is exactly and we definitely disagree on breeding practices 50 - 100 years ago but at heart are both fanciers of the dogs and it sounds like we've both had pretty amazing ones in our lives.

I've owned game bred pits - i once had to use a break stick on a boy while playing with a tether pole. He landed on a baby copper head and got bit. Latched onto that tug and would not let go. (How's that for gameness?!) Had to break him off to take him to the emergency vet. Silly goose of a dog. He was an amazing and sweet boy. Actually he saved my life once. Fell asleep with my TV on and it caught fire! :O He woke me up.

It's the same with snakes (getting back on topic!). Not every snake is right for every snake owner and some complete *insert BP-net inappropriate mean word here* get ones they are in no way, shape or form capable of owning then a tragedy happens... and it ruins it for those of us who are responsible.

Which is probably about 85% of the reason I an a total misanthrope :p

---

Strattons' book is an excellent read and doesn't contain any myths. You are starting a bit later on in the history of the breed. The practice of culling is centuries old within the earliest formation of the breed. He (Stratton) regularly read the Pit Bull Gazette and 35 Years of Fighting Dogs is also favorably mentioned in his writing. Unfortunately I can't site anything again because I'm not by the books.

We don't disagree at all on breeding practices at least I never got that impression. The point I made was the traits that were sought after beyond being a gamer by some of the folks. I don't believe I went further into my views on breeding.

I'll PM you the info in the book and also look at the rest of my materials.

I've been doing most of this tread on a cell phone which has been very frustrating and I'm not near my books.

I will give you a few other books as well.

There is a big reason these (Pits) were the ultimate family dog back in the day.

Gameness is only part of it though it is the largest part. Quality breeding for stability was a trait that was preferred.

You simply can't deal with a "pit situation" with a completely erratic animal.

The dogs were focused on the job/task at hand, and when being broken up or restarted it was always preferred, but not always the case to have something handleable.

Back then a 60 pound dog was considered a larger animal as well.

Today's dogs are not the same for the most part.

I'm glad you pointed out that I had you confused with another poster.

I'll PM you today or tomorrow.

In the event anybody is still interested or was doubting my earlier comments about the early creation of the APBT and how "man biters" were not desired and often culled you can read the info in an article that mentions Richard F. Stratton. (Page 20) He is what I would call an expert on the history of these dogs, and also well know in the game dog scene.

His research and involvement in the breed can't really be questioned. He names the names and the dogs from the past and shares his views whether you agree with them or not, he is more than qualified.

The online article is here:
http://arizona.openrepository.com/ar...182_sip1_m.pdf

Younger people may not understand that this breed dates way back. Richard is no spring chicken himself. He is one of the most passionate men when it comes to the TRUE American Pit Bull Terrier.

An interview:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwCkcnccXmw

Again I have no doubt that the information I passed on was legit, and it is sited in more than one source. Some may disagree but you are more than likely speaking of the exceptions rather than the rule. These were very sound dogs.


I own 2 of the 4 books here and both discuss the culling/euthanizing of pit dogs that bit man.
https://www.amazon.com/Book-American.../dp/0866227199

As a general rule it was an oddity to have man biters. That is not to say they didn't exist, but they were not as desired as stable game dogs.

It is flat out documented in both books. As a matter of fact a portion of a quote on page 80 from Stratton's first book reads like this. "old dog men called them (man biters) screwballs and had them euthanized."

Though not flat out stated in this book although it could be I didn't have time to read it all over again, the underlying theme is that man biters were frowned upon and it is certainly implied if you read through. Colby is probably the most influential name in the foundation of the breed. My first pit was 1/2 Colby lines.

https://www.amazon.com/Colbys-Book-A.../dp/079382091X

These are NOT myths. The breed, at one time was one of the most confident, loyal and loving dog breeds to walk the planet. Some of the best champion dogs were able to live with other animals in complete harmony and were more than affectionate and loyal to their families. They were one of the breeds least likely to bite people. Back in the day dogs often roamed and there were no leash laws. A good, confident pit knew its place and rarely caused problems according to much of these writings.

There is a reason for it and it has a lot to do with breeding history. Common sense should tell a person that any dog breeding line should contain stability. Erratic behavior generally took away from the goal and made resetting and tending to the dogs challenging.


I have several others books on this breed and many other "fighting" breeds and some field experience in various dog sport and personal protection trials. I'm not making any of this up and if you doubt me, I urge you to read about the breed history (old old history), and the old dog men and come to your own conclusion.

While pits can and do excel at dog sport and protection sports today, they are far outnumbered by the tradition breeds. Sheps, Mals, Dutchies and so on.
It isn't the true nature of a pit bull to want to bite man. Centuries leading up to and during the creation of the breed have an influence.

That said I was able to get our female into the sports but she was far more interested in kisses and pets from bystanders in our training group. I miss her dearly as she was our first and I was able get her OB title in PSA.

Voodoolamb,

I certainly consider you an asset to the breed and decided to post the books here for you, and others if they are genuinely interested in pit bulls.

I felt it more educational than a PM if others wanted to research the breed.

Somebody earlier in this thread took an unwarranted shot at the breed and I felt compelled to jump in with facts. Having owned pits, worked and titled one and now owning a wonderful, racey, built, (old school body type) black pit rescue I can attest to the REAL temperament of these dogs.

So much for the part about snakes in my lost thread : )