AmStaff / Pit Bull debate

This is where to talk about Pit Bulls!

Postby mnp13 » March 14th, 2006, 4:49 pm

I need some help finding pictures. I got into one of those discussions over what type of dog defines the registry. This came up from identifying Riggs as a Pit Bull and an AmStaff.

Does anyone have pictures of dual registered dogs or single registered dogs that don't necessarily fit the general description of what is 'expected' of the dog in that registry?

I don't think Riggs would do well in ADBA, as they tend to reward the smaller more refined look. AKC seems to like the thicker, smooth look. UKC seems to like the dogs in the middle.

Any help would be appreciated!
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17234
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby Romanwild » March 14th, 2006, 4:52 pm

This crap again! You are a trouble maker aren't you. Too bad DJ isn't around. LOL

They're all the same breed. End of discussion. :D
User avatar
Romanwild
I live here
 
Posts: 2931
Location: Watertown NY

Postby Miakoda » March 14th, 2006, 5:07 pm

Romanwild wrote:This crap again! You are a trouble maker aren't you. Too bad DJ isn't around. LOL

They're all the same breed. End of discussion. :D


LOL. Nu-uh.
User avatar
Miakoda
Devoutly Bully
 
Posts: 953
Location: Louisiana

Postby mnp13 » March 14th, 2006, 5:27 pm

I agree, but here is the post that they put up:

they wrote:So...is he an American Pit Bull Terrier or an American Staffordshire Terrier? There's a difference (not much) but you said he was AKC registered yet you refer to him as a Pit Bull.
Just curious, one is recognized by the AKC and the other is not.


we wrote:He's triple registered...as an APBT with the UKC and ADBA and AST with the AKC. In his particular case there is no difference, it's just a matter of what he's registered as with each club.


they wrote:"In his particular case there is no difference, it's just a matter of what he's registered as with each club."
What do you mean? There is a difference in structure and a noteworthy one at that! Not that this really matters, but just to clear things up, which one is he really? A lot of people may think that there is no really "pure bred" pit bull out there and I agree w/ that to a point. I guess what is more common is to just roll w/ a dog's phenotype. So which are you labeling him as, regardless of his pedigree because you are obviously choosing two-depending on the KC.
But to know the structural difference and temperment difference of both breeds, you'd be ignorant to assume that one is the same as the other. They're close indeed, but there are NOTEABLE differences!


we wrote:He is registered with the ADBA, AKC and UKC. That makes him a Pit Bull with the UKC/ADBA and an AmStaff with the AKC.
I know a few people who have finished their dogs in both registries, and one of them has finished a dog in all three.

Riggs' litter brother finished his AKC championship and they are very similar in body structure.

If I had to pick one, I would say he is more of the UKC "type", but if I packed a few extra pounds on him he would have the smoother, less muscled look that the AKC judges seem to prefer.

All that said, I am one of the "it's all the same breed" people. The AKC stud book for the AmStaff is 100% Pit Bull.

"But to know the structural difference and temperment difference of both breeds, you'd be ignorant to assume that one is the same as the other. They're close indeed, but there are NOTEABLE differences! "
Would you be more specific here?


they wrote:Send me an e-mail and I can give you "for instances". I can't readily post photos here like I can in an e-mail and do not have them all up on a web site. Feel free to copy/paste any of our conversation from such here in the future if you'd like!


I haven't gotten their email yet...
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17234
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby realpitbull » March 14th, 2006, 5:42 pm

This is an excerpt from a seminar I am writing up. Eh, I don't think there is any simple way to explain it. But if someone asks why I'd call my single-registered AmStaff a "Pit Bull" it's because I could register him as an UKC APBT anytime I wanted.

"What is a Pit Bull, Anyway?"

• Pit Bulls are a specific BREED of dog; the full name of this breed is American PIT BULL Terrier.



• The United Kennel Club & the American Dog Breeders Association recognize a breed called the American PIT BULL Terrier (APBT).



• The American Kennel Club recognizes a breed called the American STAFFORDSHIRE Terrier (AmStaffs).


• APBTs & AmStaffs are the same breed with different names. We use the term “Pit Bull” to reference both.


• The term “Pit Bull” has traditionally been used to describe a BREED of dog known as the “American Pit Bull Terrier”.

• Only recently has the media, legislators, and some animal advocates come to use this term to reference dogs that merely “look” a certain way.

• Breed experts continue to use the term “Pit Bull” as a nickname ONLY for the American Pit Bull Terrier, or its derivative, the American Staffordshire Terrier.

• Today, we will use the term “Pit Bull” to reference American Pit Bull or Staffordshire Terriers, or dogs of unknown heritage that are believed to be American Pit Bull or Staffordshire Terriers.


"Pit Bull vs. AmStaff"



• This is a “name game” played by registries.



• While all AmStaffs are Pit Bulls, not all Pit Bulls are AmStaffs.



• APBTs came first, and AmStaffs were derived from APBTs.



• Most Pit Bulls that find their way into shelters are UKC/ADBA registered or descendants of UKC/ADBA registered dogs.



• AmStaffs (dogs registered by the AKC or from parents registered by the AKC) are rarer.



• The term “Pit Bull” can accurately refer to both APBTs and AmStaffs, but “AmStaff” can only accurately refer to dogs registered by AKC or offspring of dogs registered by the AKC.
Mary Harwelik, CPDT
Certified Trainer - Pit Bull Specialist
----------------
http://www.realpitbull.com
http://www.peaceablecanines.com
realpitbull
Snot Nose Bully Pup
 
Posts: 126
Location: NJ

Postby mnp13 » March 14th, 2006, 5:46 pm

I agree with some of that, but to say AmStaffs are rarer than Pit Bulls is not true, nor is it true that UKC/ADBA dogs make up most of the Pit Bulls in shelters.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17234
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby realpitbull » March 14th, 2006, 6:08 pm

mnp13 wrote:I agree with some of that, but to say AmStaffs are rarer than Pit Bulls is not true, nor is it true that UKC/ADBA dogs make up most of the Pit Bulls in shelters.


Do you have stats to prove otherwise?

I have AKC stats, but ADBA and UKC won't release stats. As far as I can tell, AKC reg AmStaffs just aren't any where near as prevalent as UKC/ADBA reg dogs. Do I have proof that UKC/ADBA dogs or unreg'd dogs of UKC/ADBA ancestry make up the majority of Pit Bulls in shelters? Not proof in the scientific sense, but comparing the numbers of Pit Bulls in shelters to the number of AmStaffs the AKC registers every year leads me to believe me "guess" is correct.
Mary Harwelik, CPDT
Certified Trainer - Pit Bull Specialist
----------------
http://www.realpitbull.com
http://www.peaceablecanines.com
realpitbull
Snot Nose Bully Pup
 
Posts: 126
Location: NJ

Postby realpitbull » March 14th, 2006, 6:12 pm

Oh, just to make this easier....

In 2005, only 1677 AmStaffs were registered with the AKC.

But hey, this presentation is a working draft. So if you can provide info to the contrary, please share. :)

And Ps. Michelle the dog in your av makes me :D
Mary Harwelik, CPDT
Certified Trainer - Pit Bull Specialist
----------------
http://www.realpitbull.com
http://www.peaceablecanines.com
realpitbull
Snot Nose Bully Pup
 
Posts: 126
Location: NJ

Postby bahamutt99 » March 14th, 2006, 7:11 pm

At the risk of sticking my finger again in the light socket, I don't think they are the same breed. I think there is sufficient variance between the two breed standards to make them seperate breeds. I just can't take a winning ADBA dog and think its the same creature as a winning AKC dog. I'm sure there was at one point a reason for crossing the two -- Loki has AmStaff behind her, as do many dogs nowadays -- but I think that time has passed.
~~~
[b]Lindsay
[i]& the [url=http://www.freewebs.com/bahamutt99/index.htm]Gravity Dogs[/url][/i][/b]
User avatar
bahamutt99
Confident Young Bully
 
Posts: 513
Location: west Texas

Postby mnp13 » March 14th, 2006, 7:16 pm

realpitbull wrote:Do you have stats to prove otherwise?

I have AKC stats, but ADBA and UKC won't release stats. As far as I can tell, AKC reg AmStaffs just aren't any where near as prevalent as UKC/ADBA reg dogs. Do I have proof that UKC/ADBA dogs or unreg'd dogs of UKC/ADBA ancestry make up the majority of Pit Bulls in shelters? Not proof in the scientific sense, but comparing the numbers of Pit Bulls in shelters to the number of AmStaffs the AKC registers every year leads me to believe me "guess" is correct.


No, but do you have stats that prove that is IS true? I'm not being arguemenative but to point fingers at one registry for causing the problem is not good for the breed as a whole.

The AKC has low registry numbers, but that doesn't mean that the BYB's of the world are not pumping out dogs from 'AKC registered' parents. They don't have to register the litters, but my local paper has 5 different AmStaff litters listed today alone. Most buyers are pet owners and don't register their dogs, but I hear the 'my dog was expensive so I have to breed him' crap all the time.

And to nit pick, since every AmStaff has Pit Bull ancestry, every pure bred Pit Bull (regardless of registry) goes back to the UKC/ADBA Pit Bull.

I would guess what you are saying is correct actually, BUT if you can't back it up with actual data then I don't think you should say it. Whether you mean it that way or not, it makes it sound like AKC breeders are the responsible ones and the UKC/ADBA breeders are the problem. that's just not true.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17234
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby JCleve86 » March 14th, 2006, 7:26 pm

The definition of "breed" is that when two specimins of the same breed mate, they breed "true." I'm sorry, but if you bred a dog like STP's Buck to, say, this CH Amstaff, you are NOT going to get a consistant litter...they will not breed true.
Image
Image

I don't know that I'd consider APBTs and ASTs entirely seperate breeds, but rather seperate types of one breed.
JCleve86
Confident Young Bully
 
Posts: 465
Location: Puyallup, WA

Postby Malli » March 14th, 2006, 10:18 pm

I kind of always thought of AST and APBT as the same? With variences in the group of dogs registered as each (I've seen some tiny compact AmStaffs and APBT's)
The only one I noticed that seems to stand out as definately seperate is the SBT, who, while looks similar is obviously a seperate breed.

Malli
User avatar
Malli
E-I-E-I-O!
 
Posts: 6341
Location: CANADA EH?

Postby Romanwild » March 14th, 2006, 10:30 pm

The narrower people make the criteria the worse off the dogs will be. We've all seen it happen before. The three registeries allow for a broad description that these dogs can be bred within. That allows them to excell at different things.

The Amstaff people that want to think they don't own pit bulls are delusional and/or snobbish. BSL knows what they are.

The UKC allows them to register. That means that there is UKC and ADBA blood that comes back into the AKC. HAAA!

I got news for you! There were Amstaffs that were fighters!!!!

Michelle, how that person going to show you temperment differences in a picture?
User avatar
Romanwild
I live here
 
Posts: 2931
Location: Watertown NY

Postby mnp13 » March 14th, 2006, 10:38 pm

The AKC named the Pit Bull the Staffordshire Terrier when they added them to their list of 'recognized breeds' the entire foundation stock was UKC Pit Bulls. In the 70's when the (English) Staffordshire Terrier was added to the AKC they changed the name to American Staffordshire Terrier. (As I remember it, I didn't go look it up again)

In my opinion, they are 100% the same dog. Type is different, but there are variations in type in every breed. A German Shepherd is still a German Shepherd, regardless of if it is a displastic show ring dog or an actual working lines dog.

You can start with 50 Pit Bulls and end up with a dog of a different breed.
Michelle

Inside me is a thin woman trying to get out. I usually shut the bitch up with a martini.
User avatar
mnp13
Evil Overlord
 
Posts: 17234
Location: Rochester, NY

Postby cheekymunkee » March 14th, 2006, 10:48 pm

I believe they are all APBT too. The AST starting foundation was the APBT, no other breed was added in order to create the AST, therefor they are STILL APBT, just with a different name. You can call them Yankee Terrier, Snot Nose Brat dogs, Big Whining Baby dogs and they are STILL American Pit Bull Terriers. :|
There's a fine line between genius and insanity. I have erased this line.

Debby
User avatar
cheekymunkee
I Have Your Grass
 
Posts: 28540
Location: Dallas

Postby Blitzkrieg Staffords » March 14th, 2006, 11:39 pm

Does it really matter? They are all different types of this, Staffordshire Bull Terrier...the original.
Image

The AST came from the APBT, and if you go back far enough in any APBT pedigree, you will see they came from either England, or Ireland.
Blitzkrieg Staffords
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 62
Location: Louisville, Kentucky

Postby Hartagold AmStaffs » March 15th, 2006, 1:02 am

mnp13 wrote:I agree with some of that, but to say AmStaffs are rarer than Pit Bulls is not true, nor is it true that UKC/ADBA dogs make up most of the Pit Bulls in shelters.


Um, AKC registers approx. 1600 AmStaffs a year. ADBA supposedly registers something like 200,000. :shock:

And if the people don't register the dogs w/AKC, they're NOT AmStaffs. AmStaff simply means AKC registered pit bull, IMO.
User avatar
Hartagold AmStaffs
Just Whelped
 
Posts: 25
Location: Ambridge PA, USA

Postby JCleve86 » March 15th, 2006, 2:25 am

Hartagold AmStaffs wrote:And if the people don't register the dogs w/AKC, they're NOT AmStaffs. AmStaff simply means AKC registered pit bull, IMO.


Right. I agree wholeheartedly.

I don't think you can just say "Amstaff" or "APBT" (or otherwise have the papers saying so) and assume the dogs will be "typey" of that specific "sect" of the breed. I do, however, think there is a huge difference between what is generally seen in the winning Amstaffs of the AKC and the winning APBTs of the ADBA. Like I said, it doesn't make them different BREEDS, but rather different types...to deny that the dogs I pictured look completely different is...well...crazy. :D

To me it's about seeing the types, not the labels...there are some Amstaffs that are very correct (like mister Grant) and some APBTs that look like hippos, and visa versa...the KC and it's respective label doesn't make the dog.
JCleve86
Confident Young Bully
 
Posts: 465
Location: Puyallup, WA

Postby realpitbull » March 15th, 2006, 10:54 am

mnp13 wrote:I would guess what you are saying is correct actually, BUT if you can't back it up with actual data then I don't think you should say it. Whether you mean it that way or not, it makes it sound like AKC breeders are the responsible ones and the UKC/ADBA breeders are the problem. that's just not true.


Hi Michelle,

Thank you for your thoughts.

My intention wasn't to point fingers at one registry over another (I have problems with all 3 of them). Actually, the points about what registries end up in shelters the most wasn't even relevant to this conversation and I should have left that out. I just wanted to share some of the points I use in explaining the whole "Amstaff vs. Pit Bull" thing.

I should mention that this excerpt is from a seminar I am doing for rescues and shelters who have a habit of naming anything an "AmStaff" because they think it sounds better than "Pit Bull". I made the numbers assumption based on known and perceived registry numbers as well as my knowledge of what ends up in shelters in my area (NJ/NY). I can't really remember the last time I saw a shelter or rescue dog that screamed "I'm an AmStaff". I see a lot of red/red nose dogs, pies, small gamey looking dogs or tall lanky mix- types. Shelters and rescues call the darndest looking things "AmStaffs" (I have noticed a funny trend that many of these dogs are red/red nose).

My point of view is that while we can make a very good guess that a dog is a "Pit Bull" in general, calling something an "AmStaff" means you must have knowledge that the dog is AKC. That's what I'm trying to get across to shelters. Yes, I admit I am anal about the whole name thing. :D
Mary Harwelik, CPDT
Certified Trainer - Pit Bull Specialist
----------------
http://www.realpitbull.com
http://www.peaceablecanines.com
realpitbull
Snot Nose Bully Pup
 
Posts: 126
Location: NJ

Postby realpitbull » March 15th, 2006, 11:03 am

JCleve86 wrote:The definition of "breed" is that when two specimins of the same breed mate, they breed "true." I'm sorry, but if you bred a dog like STP's Buck to, say, this CH Amstaff, you are NOT going to get a consistant litter...they will not breed true.
Image
Image

I don't know that I'd consider APBTs and ASTs entirely seperate breeds, but rather seperate types of one breed.


Ya know, I used to think that they were COMPLETELY different breeds. I would vehemently defend my position. That's when I had my ADBA dog and was only hanging around ADBA dogs.

Then I started hanging around with AKC dogs too.

And now my opinion is that they are the same breed.
Mary Harwelik, CPDT
Certified Trainer - Pit Bull Specialist
----------------
http://www.realpitbull.com
http://www.peaceablecanines.com
realpitbull
Snot Nose Bully Pup
 
Posts: 126
Location: NJ

Next

Return to Pit Bull Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot]

cron