mnp13 wrote:
I look at Connor's easy going nature, and if dog aggression is his only fault but the rest is good, I'm not going to play with it.
pitbullmamaliz wrote:To play devil's advocate again: What if somebody really likes the appearance and good-natured temperament of the pit bull but doesn't WANT a drivey dog, just a pet dog. Wouldn't having pit bulls less prone to dog aggression help these owners keep their dogs out of the media?
pitbullmamaliz wrote:To play devil's advocate again: What if somebody really likes the appearance and good-natured temperament of the pit bull but doesn't WANT a drivey dog, just a pet dog. Wouldn't having pit bulls less prone to dog aggression help these owners keep their dogs out of the media?
Malli wrote:yep. there are going to be mellower puppies in every litter.
ArtGypsy wrote:Muttkip wrote:They did breed away from the DA, and what did we get?
The Am Satff and the Am Bully.
Really???
So I would have gone out and LOOKED for an AmStaff, I would have had all the great bully traits but less chance that the dog that had DA?
I did not know this......
plebayo wrote:Can you really breed out dog aggression? I mean obviously you could probably produce a dog who is less likely to be dog aggressive, but IMO if a dog doesn't like other dogs, it doesn't like other dogs. This isn't a behavior just limited to Terriers. I'm just not sure who came up with the bright idea that dogs really should love each other. Although they are somewhat pack oriented - they are NOT wolves, their lives don't depend on being social with other dogs.
pitbullmamaliz wrote:To play devil's advocate again: What if somebody really likes the appearance and good-natured temperament of the pit bull but doesn't WANT a drivey dog, just a pet dog. Wouldn't having pit bulls less prone to dog aggression help these owners keep their dogs out of the media?
mnp13 wrote:TheRedQueen wrote:I'm very, very, very tired...so I'm just rambling. But if there are examples of great dogs that aren't DA, why would everyone think that getting rid of DA mean that everything good about the breed would disappear?
There are also horrible examples of the breed, that their only redeeming quality is that they are not DA.
Would you consider a "herder" a "herder" if it no longer wanted to fetch? No, I'm not saying that dog aggression defines the Pit Bull, but the origins of the breed are the pit, part of the foundation of the breed was dog aggression - but it was also the easy going temperament, the drive, and everything else. How do you keep the two dozen fantastic traits, but remove one? My answer - you don't.
So yeah, they don't herd...but they show their type in other ways...in other behaviors. I do "get it" because my breed (Aussie) is moving towards big fluffy golden retriever type dogs...that love everyone and would pass out in the heat if asked to do anything strenuous. I don't want dogs like that...I want my weird herding dogs that are protective/stand-offish/reserved, etc.
TheRedQueen wrote: Malinois and GSDs are two breeds that I've seen a lot of...breeds that excel in many things, but not herding. Now not to say that there aren't some that do herd...but how many do you see REALLY herding...?
furever_pit wrote:Or breeders just need to screen their buyers and owners more carefully. If someone doesn't want to deal with the things that come with the breed then they should be getting a different dog.
Or if people want a dog with a known temperament they should go to the shelter and get an adult dog.
I honestly think that dogs would be better off if breeders were more willing to cull their progeny and less willing to hand them out to John Q. Public.
Or perhaps owners need to take more responsibility for their pets. Contain them properly. Pursue even basic training. Learn to read their pets signals so that when their pet does get stressed, that they can take control of the situation. (As a sidenote: dogs that find this world so incredibly stressful are not well tempered animals imo - ESPECIALLY a bulldog.)
TheRedQueen wrote:But honestly...have you seen some of these dogs that rescues are saving nowadays? I mean...I know many people that got turned off of rescuing by going to the shelter and finding it full of aggressive or fearful dogs. I find that extremely sad...as I'm into rescuing, myself. I have had my share of fosters...and not all were family pet quality.
TheRedQueen wrote:Then why breed at all? Breed for that ONE dog out of a litter that might be worthwhile in the ring?
furever_pit wrote:TheRedQueen wrote:But honestly...have you seen some of these dogs that rescues are saving nowadays? I mean...I know many people that got turned off of rescuing by going to the shelter and finding it full of aggressive or fearful dogs. I find that extremely sad...as I'm into rescuing, myself. I have had my share of fosters...and not all were family pet quality.
And that is why shelters and rescues should cull the population as well.
On the other hand, I have seen rescue dogs that go on to be decent workers.
TheRedQueen wrote:Then why breed at all? Breed for that ONE dog out of a litter that might be worthwhile in the ring?
Just so we are clear: I don't speak in terms of the conformation right, I couldn't care less about that endeavor to be honest; I speak in terms of working dogs. But if all a breeder gets out of a litter is one worthwhile dog then they probably shouldn't repeat the breeding. . I know several breeders (not just of APBTs) who cull their litters. Even after the those decisions are made there are usually several pups to keep within the program or to be placed in working homes with other people who are trying to preserve and better the breed.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users