Pit Bull Blog

by Lindsay B. (aka bahamutt99)

I haven’t had much to say lately, so I figured I’d compose my thoughts about breed ownership in a poem.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Crate n’ Rotate
Plastic crates and doggie gates
All day in and out again
Supervize and separate
Its been this way since God knows when

In the crate when they get fed
Separate rooms throughout the day
In the crate when they go to bed
Tomorrow cycles the same way

In the yard one at a time
Tie-outs, kennels, walk on a leash
Some would scrap at the drop of a dime
It keeps me busy, to say the least

Walk ‘em past with caution and care
Let the young ones play while they get along
Eye contact is as good as a dare
And makes them sing the Pit Bull song

Makes me wonder on those hard days
If other dog owners could handle this strife
Would they balk and run away
If crate and rotate was their life?

What if they couldn’t walk down the street
Without the sting of nasty stares
Or if those strangers that they’d meet
Whisked their children away with angry glares

What if they had no place to live
Because their breed caused doors to close
And they knew that something had to give
When dodging thorns to keep a rose

What is it about this breed
That makes us want to deal with this?
Impulse to help a dog in need
Or are there toxins in a Pit Bull kiss?

I have threatened, heaven forbid
To trade them in for some tiny toy breed
But I couldn’t do it; I only kid
‘Cuz at times you need humor to succeed

So as I shuffle them like a card game
Entrenched in the Pit Bull ownership mess
I think “is it worth it, or am I insane?”
The answer has to be “hell, yes.”

by Lindsay B. (aka bahamutt99)

I understand the importance of putting our best paw forward; I really do.

We should share what is great about these dogs.  We should brag about their funny, loving, affectionate, playful personalities.  And their pain tolerance and stoicisim, and how that translates into an awesome pet for children.  We need to remind that these dogs have short coats, clean manners, and are the perfect size for everything from an apartment to a farm.

But I’ve noticed a disturbing trend in some places of painting a picture of this breed as only all that is good and shiny about dogs, without any drawbacks.  If we discuss how the breed is high-drive and may show aggression towards other animals, and that potential owners should believe in the idea of crate-and-rotate, there are those who would say that were are doing the breed a disservice.  The line is drawn that by talking about the uncomfortable side of the breed, we are no better than those who would see it banned.

I wonder if other breeds have this problem.  Are there those who would go on the Border Collie forums and take others to task for daring to say that BCs are too high-energy to be kept in a small house all day?  Is there a certain segment that gets upset if one were to suggest that a Patterdale Terrier is not the best choice for a home with free-roaming Guinea Pigs?

Why are we so drawn to the idea that every breed should be easy and biddable, and should discard all their deeply-ingrained traits in order to fit more comfortably into the situations that we devise for them?  Are we that afraid of a challenge?  Is the idea that you might have to shut a few doors or look twice before you let your dog out so unapalatable?  And if so, should the person who thinks so really be bringing a combat-bred dog into their home?

When I was much more of a newcomer to the breed, around 15 years old, we had two Pit Bulls and a Pit Bull/Akita mix. Two of the dogs were the offspring of the third, and got along very nicely.  They played together, and ate out of the same feed pan.  It was a beautiful, idyllic situation that any dog owner should envy.

One day, I had my peacefully-cohabitating pack out in the yard for some play time.  I was having a game of tug with mama dog, trying to spin her like I’d seen other people do.  (Like I said, I was an amateur, and therefore impressed with such things.)  She would hang on the rope for a bit, and then let go.  One of the times that she loosed her grip, her year-old daughter lit into her like a rocket, and suddenly I had a fight on my hands.  Having not been properly proofed for such things, I started to panic, and I’m not sure how I managed to get those two broken up.  They fought several more times in the weeks that followed, until we eventually gave one of the dogs away.

I was not Internet-savvy at that age, so I didn’t yet have the experience of other Pit Bull people trying desperately to educate me about proper management of my dogs.  Even if that were the case, I probably would’ve scoffed it off and said “my dogs get along just fine.”  I might have even accused the other party of trying to make a bad profile for the breed, and why would they even say such things if they claim to love these dogs?

As it stands right now, I have the benefit of some years of experience to rely on, and my experience tells me that disregarding the driven, potentially aggressive side of the breed does not make it go away.  Well-meaning comments from owners that they keep a pack of 10 Pit Bulls together with no problems whatsoever are as meaningless as stories of Greyhounds who share their squeaky toys with cute little bunnies.

If you’ve got an animal-loving APBT, pat yourself on the back, but think twice before you recommend the experience to others.  The truth will leave newbies better-prepared than a pastel vision of possibilities that may not come to pass.

So what is the truth?

The truth is that these are incredible dogs.  They have funny personalities, short coats, and make great companions for children.  The flip side — but still the truth — is that they have the capacity to deal great damage or even death to other animals.

You can manage aggression, but only if you acknowledge it and not refute it.  The best and most suitable homes for this breed are those that are well-versed in its history, and who don’t mind a few rules to keep the situation safe and harmonious.  Does that mean crate-and-rotate plus breaking sticks in every room?  Well, that’s what it means in some houses.  Other people can get away with allowing small play groups of the most compatible personalities, just not a free-for-all with every animal out at once.

Accepting the breed for what it is, and preparing for aggression, do not constitute an acknowledgement that the breed is somehow faulty.  Think of a breaking stick as an insurance policy that you may never need, but would be better off having.  View breaking down a multi-pet household into smaller play groups as similar to putting on your seat belt, just in case.  We would not consider a driver who belts up and insures himself as irresponsible, so why do we insist upon no precautions for APBT ownership?

As I type this, my three purebred American Pit Bull Terriers are in the room with me.  Loki is chewing a bone, Priest is sitting and watching her, and Terra patrols for stray crumbs.  In the room with me is a breaking stick.  I keep my ears open for signs of discontent, periodically look over for signs of stink eye, and send snotty attitudes to their crates in the next room until they cool off.  On the other side of a door to the master bathroom is the cat’s domain, with a board to prevent him from sticking his feet under the door.  My dad keeps his small dog with him at the other end of the house, out of bulldog territory.

My precautions wouldn’t even be noticeable unless I pointed them out to you, or you knew to look for them.  My dogs are not killing each other.  In fact, they all get along most of the time.  We could even put all 5 in a room together if we wanted.  But by rotating the dogs who are out together and using some simple precautions, we prevent a lot of potential heartache.  By remembering that I own APBTs, I can manage them accordingly, and keep the house relatively cohesive.  There is no point in pushing the dogs into interactions that will only lead to hurt feelings.

So to those who believe that it is only the breed’s fearsome reputation that makes it a danger to other animals, believe what you will.  But I hope you secretly prepare for the possibility, and do not get lulled into a false sense of security.  (That’s the stuff that “he just turned” stories are made of.)  Myself, I will continue to own and love this breed for what it is, and accept both the good and the bad of it.

I haven’t posted anything in a while, so I thought I’d copy my response to a local article in which a woman is seeking to have the breed banned in my town.  (Oklahoma has a BSL prohibition.)  This is the long version of my response.  I had to trim down the posted version to fit 2000 characters.

by Lindsay B. (aka bahamutt99)

I am so glad that I live in Oklahoma, the state where my dogs can live peacefully without being seized and killed just for being alive.  I moved down here from St. Louis, Missouri, and since leaving Missouri, I am sad to admit that my home state has been overrun by these bad, discriminatory, breed-specific laws (BSL).  People don’t know where to go with their dogs; there’s nowhere you can move and be safe.

It is a mindset of incredible ignorance that seeks to identify the guilty before they commit a crime.  As it is, you can own a gun or drive a car, under the presumption that you are a responsible adult and will obey the laws.  You can be black, or Hispanic, or Asian, or white, and the law does not seek to pre-determine your drive to commit crimes based on your race.  However, BSL makes the presumption that I am guilty because of my dogs, and that is much the same tactic as legal racism.  (I own three American Pit Bull Terriers.)

What is the attraction to the breed?  I have many reasons.  Our first was a stray Pit Bull mix.  (Mixed with what, we don’t know.  Pot-bellied pig perhaps.)  As a child, I loved how Chew would always be eager to play, never tired, never cranky or irritable.  Having been bitten by other dogs, it was wonderfully awesome for me to have a dog who took all my childishness in stride and asked for seconds.

As an adult, I started getting into dog training, and the natural choice for me was the American Pit Bull Terrier.  Their versatility is incredible.  They are small enough to fit in my home, big enough and sturdy enough to roughhouse with.  Smart enough to do obedience, agile and quick enough to do agility and frisbee competitions.  Strong enough to do weight pull, pretty enough to do conformation (the “dog shows” people see on TV, like Westminster).  I love their wash-and-wear short coats, and the rainbow of colors they come in.  Suffice it to say, protection, biting, intimidation, dog fighting: these things were not my motivation for getting APBTs.  They are, quite simply, the most suitable dog for me.

Nobody should deny me the right to choose my own canine companion.  Nor should you deny anybody else that same right, provided they operate within the bounds of the law.  Profiling is not acceptable to me, and should not be acceptable to anybody who values their constitutional rights.  This is not a dog issue.  It is an issue of human irresponsibility, bad choices, media influence, animal control problems, and perception.

Consider that a study at www.canineresearch.net illustrates that 98% of the studied population (including canine professionals) cannot identify an American Pit Bull Terrier without also misidentifying other breeds as “pit bulls.”  This study also tells us that 85% of people who expressed a dislike of the breed could not identify it at all!

So what animal are we talking about here?  Well, I know what animal I’m talking about, but most seem to regard it as some mythical mentality that possesses any dog with a short coat and muscles.  In short, we could be referring to any number of breeds or mixes, with no attempt made to define any clear boundaries as to what constitutes a “pit bull” or not.  The bull mastiff who attacked the ONG worker that jumped his fence was identified by readers on another forum as a “pit bull,” when he was not.  The same can be said of the bull terriers in Midwest City; they were also misidentified by laymen as something they are not.

We should not even be thinking about these kinds of laws.  Gun control does not protect us from criminals with guns, but rather serves to keep guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens.  The same argument is applicable to breed control.  Consider the Tulsa man whose pit bull attacked a Dachshund last year.  He clearly stated that he wanted people to think he had a mean dog, because they wouldn’t try coming in his house.  His reason for owning a dog is clear, and no breed would be safe in his hands.  I, on the other hand, raise my dogs to be social and well-mannered, and they are completely safe under my influence (as well as the influence of the good genetics behind them).

To wrap up a long-winded response, dogs are not the problem.  We have some excellent laws in Tulsa, which if enforced, would help all of us.  Dogs should not be running loose, should not be encouraged to be aggressive, and they should not be casually breeding.  We have laws to govern those problems, and each of them falls squarely on the head of the human handler.  We just need to look at the correct end of the leash.

by Lindsay B. (aka bahamutt99)

I was browsing the message boards tonight, as I always do, and came across a topic regarding a new HSUS (Humane Society of the US) stamp with a patch-eyed Pit Bull featuring the text “I’m a lover, not a fighter.”

While the general consensus was appreciation for the design, there was also resistance to buying a stamp that would support HSUS.  One member even commented on how real animal lovers aren’t supporting animal rights groups, such as HSUS and PETA.

So why the discrepancy?  Why would anybody who claims to love animals be against a group who claims to want to help animals?

There is a massive difference between animal rights and animal welfare, and therein lies the rub.

Animal welfare:  The desire to protect animals from unnecessary pain, suffering, abuse and mistreatment.

Animal rights:  The desire elevate the status of animals to one equal to or greater than humans.  Also the desire to see animals freed from any useage whatsoever.  This includes service animals, private pets, animal-based medical research and products, as well as eating meat or using any animal by-products.  The ultimate goal of the animal rights movement is total animal liberation.

Most animal lovers support animal welfare, which is all well and good in my opinion.  The desire to protect animals from unnecessary bad things is a noble goal.  Nobody should want to see animals hurt, beaten, tortured, neglected.  And admittedly, the ideal of animal welfare probably steps into some grey areas, such as cosmetic surgeries (ear cropping, tail docking).  That is going to happen; no two people will ever agree 100% on everything.  But by and large, the animal welfare sect has its head screwed on right.

Animal rights, by my scary stuff scale, is a much more frightening proposition.

With rights come responsibilities.  You have a right to free speech, but you have a responsibility not to shout “fire!” in a crowded theater.  You have the right to bear arms, but you have the responsibility not to shoot innocent bystanders. Animals have no grasp of our society’s laws, and therefore don’t understand what their responsibilities would be now that they have these newfound rights.

Additionally, animals are like children in that they cannot dictate what would be the best decisions for them.  Undoubtedly, if my dog were given the right to choose what she wanted to eat for dinner, she would demand whatever I was eating, and that’s hardly the choice that’s going to keep her the healtiest.  We have a responsibility to take care of the animals we’ve domesticated, since they cannot care for themselves.  They cannot simply slide into this idyllic scenario that the animal rights crowd envisions for them.

I think one of the reasons many people support animal rights is simply our tendency to take things at face value.  We don’t want to get into the nitty gritty of things.  Many of us would prefer to stay plugged into the matrix, and have our reality be the sugar-coated version, rather than seeing the ugly truth of things.  Its far neater and less painful that way.

I compare the animal rights movement to peanut butter.

To the average American, there is nothing more wholesome than a good ol’ peanut butter and jelly sandwich, with a nice cold glass of milk.  Make mine on wheat bread, lightly toasted, please.

But how many of us really read the ingredients and know what they signify?  I mean, this is what we’re feeding ourselves and our kids, so it should be healthy and nutritious, right?  Vitamins and minerals, protien and all that, right?

How about partially hydrogenated vegetable oil?  That stuff kills you.  But how many parents feed it to their kids as lunch or an after-school snack, without even bothering to look at the side effects?

Animal rights are the same in that people will support and buy into the feel-good portion, without bothering to read the ingredients.  They hear “helping animals,” “saving animals,” “protecting animals,” but they do not hear “ending pet ownership,” “torching research labs,” “supporting domestic terrorism,” “sending people in pig suits to educate children against eating meat,” or any of the other bad portions.

Animal rights is scary.  HSUS, for example, makes millions, but does not operate a single animal shelter.  They could be saving countless lives, but instead they concern themselves with pushing for the destruction of Michael Vick’s dogs, while on the other hand begging for money to care for them.  (HSUS didn’t have custody of any of Vick’s dogs.  I wonder where those donations went?)

For my fellow APBT owners, I offer this tidbit as well:  These organizations which claim to be about protecting animals do not extend their dubious sanctuary to our breed.

HSUS takes a PC approach to their philosophy.  They don’t support breed bans.  No no no, of course not.  They only support local ordinances to spay/neuter the breed into extinction.  That’s the kinder way to eliminate something, and its HSUS’s way of giving “extra protections” to Pit Bulls.  They indicate that if you have a Pit Bull and want to keep all of its parts, you have the dog for the wrong reason, and are contributing to the abuse of the breed.

PETA is more open about their philosophy:  Just eliminate the breed and be done with it.

It seems as if owning a Pit Bull means you must be more politically aware.  Because we are considered the weakest link in the chain, and therefore make an easy target for the animal rights movement.  Divide and conquer.  Lord knows I wasn’t politically aware prior to getting into this breed.

However, animal rights isn’t just against our breed.  It is against dog ownership in general.  And not just dog ownership; it is against many things traditional to our culture, and many things we have come to enjoy and embrace.  It isn’t just about no more hunting or fishing, no more meat or fur.

Own a dog?  Cat?  Goldfish?  Horses?  No more of that.  Its exploitation.

No more agility trials, conformation shows, weight pulls, tracking trials, search and rescue.  After all, no self-respecting dog is going do those things voluntarily, and corrupting his right to free choice is abuse.

Do you have an incurable disease?  You’d better hope the answer isn’t dependent upon a laboratory mouse, because they have a right to not suffer or die for our betterment.

Horse carriage rides?  Please.  Petting zoos for children?  As if.  A dog to guide your blind kin?  Get real.

These are the hydrogenated oils of the animal rights movement.  They hook you with the peanut butter — SAVE ANIMALS! — but you can’t enjoy the PB without ingesting the stuff that will kill you.

If you support animal rights organizations, you are supporting everything they do, not just the stuff that you are in favor of.  You can’t join up because you appreciate the good work they did, say, saving ex-racing greyhounds in a cruelty case — just an example; I have no clue if this actually happened — without also vicariously supporting, oh, animal rights whackos teaching people how to build incendiary devices.

I am not an alarmist by nature, but these people make me nervous.

Believe that once they are done eliminating all the fur ranchers, all the pet shops, all the Pit Bulls and their drug-dealing owners, they will run over something you treasure.  The more support these people get, the more powerful they become, and the further they can advance their cause.  They nibble at the weakest links in the dog fancy — perhaps ear cropping, or breeding, or using dogs to hunt — but never forget their ultimate goal:  Total animal liberation.

Total.

So I guess the question in my mind is, why would anybody want to support an animal rights group?

If everybody who donates to the HSUS or PETA would instead donate to their local animal shelter, think how the conditions could improve for the animals that those places save!  The local humane organizations are the ones who are doing the dirty work, and they don’t have the multi-million dollar budget that these groups have.  Better yet, if groups like the EBA or ADOA had half the support of the HSUS, we would have a powerful tool at our disposal to help fight BSL, rather than embrace it.

I am sincerely asking anybody who reads this blog:  Please read the fine print!  Check that ingredient label.  If you are signing a petition — even if it seems overall good — find out who started it.  If you get a set of address labels with a plea for donations in the mail, ask yourself how they can afford such propaganda if they are hard at work helping animals.

On an unrelated but equally important note, if you are writing in support of a piece of legislation, read the whole bill.  Find out which groups are supporting it, and why.  Read read read!  For example, there is a new federal anti-dog fighting bill — even though dog-fighting is illegal countrywide — which is garnering support on the pretense that we need felony laws to get at the evil dog fighters.  However, it also contains language that would illegalize using the USPS to ship “paraphernalia,” which could be anything from a breaking stick, to a treadmill belt, to a collar, to a historical book, to a tug toy.

Educate yourself.  Read the fine print.  Know what you are supporting before you ally your good name with something you don’t fully understand.

by Lindsay B. (Bahamutt99)

The arguments against breeders abound these days.  If you’ve never heard them — where have you been, in a cave? — here are a sampling, paraphrased:

“Why buy an expensive breeder puppy when there are perfectly good pups dying in shelters?  If you only want a pet, you should rescue.”

“Breeders are the main reason for the overpopulation problem; these dogs have to be coming from somewhere.”

“The only reason to buy from a breeder is selfishness and ego.  People need a well-bred dog to feel better about themselves, and a rescue dog isn’t good enough for them.”

Undoubtedly there are unscrupulous breeders who are cluttering up the issue with their shady practices. Nobody in command of all their faculties will tell you otherwise.  Just like there are undoubtedly wastes of skin in every hobby, profession, neighborhood.  There are always people who make you scratch your head in bewilderment, or drive you to the point of hair-tugging (or perhaps, blogging).

So with all the arguments against it, why again do we need breeders?  Have a sit down and I’ll tell you a story.

Long ago, man discovered that the dog could serve as his partner and aide in many capacities.  Before we even gave a name to the process of selective breeding, people were doing it.  Wherever we needed a dog to fill a purpose, selective breeding came into play to mold the perfect animal for the job.  People who might want rabbit for dinner were taking the fastest dog they owned and breeding it to the second-fastest dog they owned, then keeping the fastest puppies.  Shepherds who needed to keep their flocks together were going to feed (and breed) the dog who showed the most aptitude for chasing the sheep back home.  Thus were many breeds born, out of necessity, by those who kept around the dogs who were the most skilled at their trade.

Today, we tell people “choose a breed that fits your lifestyle.”  We balk at those who have the audacity to choose an APBT as dog park patron, or a Border Collie as an apartment couch potato.  The breeds have become so varied that there is almost certainly one to fit every seeker, provided that person is inclined towards dog ownership in the first place.

These breeds arose due to the efforts of breeders.  They are maintained by the efforts of breeders.  If dog breeding were outlawed tomorrow, all owned dogs were spayed/neutered – and we could somehow magically achieve a 100% compliance rate — within 10-15 years, most breeds would be gone.  Only the small, long-lived breeds would still be here, for a few more years anyway.  It is a hard concept for those who are counting bodies at the animal shelter to grasp, that there would ever be no more dogs, but it is simple mathematics.

No more breeding = no more dogs (with the exception of feral populations who don’t require human intervention to maintain them).

Instead of being able to tell people “choose a breed that fits your lifestyle,” it would sound more like this:  “Choose which of those medium-sized, medium-coated, prick-eared brown mutts you like the best.  Here’s a rope to catch him with.”  Think dingo, or Carolina dog.  If everything reverted back to natural selection, eventually nature would level the canine out to be similar to his wild brethren.

I don’t know how you feel, but the thought of no more Pit Bulls is unpalatable to me.  I would have no desire to own a dog if I couldn’t keep the breed that has been with me since I was 8 years old.

Okay, let’s take a step back into reality.  Even though dog ownership is under attack with every new law that is crafted, it is unlikely that breeding will ever be wiped out entirely.  Too many people want to own dogs.  So now what we have are the laws that merely nibble away at the breeding that is taking place nowadays.  I’m talking about the feel-good legislation known as mandatory spay/neuter, or breeder permits.

Stopping the killing of little baby puppies?  I mean, who could possibly be against that?

But there’s a problem.  Mandatory spay/neuter doesn’t stop the killing of dogs in shelters.  People will still continue to dump dogs, for various minute reasons.  There will still be dogs in shelters which are unadoptable and need to be euthanized.  There will still be strays on the street.

You see, animal control does not have the power to go around lifting the skirt of every dog out there.  How would you feel if somebody stopped you in the park and demanded that you flip your dog over so that he could check for a spay scar?  (Undoubtedly that would lead to certain people stabbing their dogs to fake a scar.  But I digress…)  Did you by chance implant Neuticles when you neutered your male dog?  Better make it ball bearings instead so they click together as incontrovertible proof that those testicles aren’t real.

Sound ridiculous?  Well, so does attacking breeders to end pet overpopulation.  Let me share my own personal experience with mandatory spay/neuter, breeder permit laws.

I live in a city where there is a neat little law governing dog breeding.  You can only obtain what they call a “hobbyist exemption” if you show or work your dogs, or use them for hunting.  I should naturally qualify for this “hobbyist exemption” because my dog is extensively titled, so I headed down to the county office to get one.  More accurately, after probably a dozen phone calls trying to get information on this law from government employees who knew nothing about it, I headed down to the county office to get one.

Guess what?  Due to a legal loophole, I can’t get one.  Although I am within the county which has these laws, the actual city I live in chooses not to honor them.  No hobbyist exemption for me.  No big deal, though, right?  Not if it is saving lives, right?

Guess again.  On any given weekend, somewhere in my city, there are people selling puppies.  Earlier this summer, the Shih Tzu people were out in force, with their expensive RVs pulled up in an empty lot, and exercise pens set up in the sun near the road.  Earlier than that, a man and his son were selling black Lab puppies less than a block from my home.  Earlier still, Labrador and Boxer breeders were selling puppies in front of the mall.  Maybe I’m not giving them their due credit; perhaps we simply have the world’s most responsible breeder population and all of these folks have their permits. But last I checked, no breeder worth their salt sells pups on a street corner.

Call the police? Sure, but half the time they don’t know that these laws even exist.  I had the dispatcher one time ask me, “We have laws like that here?”

To reiterate, I cannot, with my proof of extensive titles and health testing, breed dogs.

Some guy advertising a litter of American Bulldog/AmStaff mixes, can.

They’re going to get away with it, whether we like it or not.  Mandatory spay/neuter is not stopping these people. I am just as against haphazard breeding as anybody.  But I am not so deluded as to think that an extra law is going to stop it.  The only people who go through the hassle of having moral fibers are the ones who are doing the right thing anyway.  In short, not the ones we need to be making laws for.

So why do we need breeders?  To preserve, protect and improve the breeds.  If you feel that a dog is a dog is a dog, then this means nothing to you. But having a well-bred dog means everything to others.

We do not own a dog because of need. At least the vast majority of us don’t.  A person needs to eat, drink, breathe.  We do not need to own pets.  We do so because of the pleasure and sense of fulfillment it gives us.  And everybody has a different ideal for their dog.  When does it become another’s place to say that a person should not have the right to choose exactly the dog that they want?

Are you sending me dog food?  Scooping my yard?  As the answer is resoundingly negative, I ask where it is written that you should have a say in what kind of dog is sleeping in bed with me.

I will admit that I am fed up with the constant controls that people will place on each other out of the mistaken belief that they will make things better.  Evidently the threat of BSL taking my breed from me is not enough; I also have to worry about other people who should be on my side seeking to have my dreams and future plans destroyed as well.  I have been called greedy and selfish for wanting well-bred, registerable APBTs over shelter dogs.  It is a virtual certainty that once I pair two dogs together, I will slip even further on the totem pole.  I have accepted these things.

But what I will not accept is people pushing for limitation or elimination of ALL breeders as a means to save the breed (or rather, as a means to simply save dogs and not the breed).  Ouch!  We’ve gone and shot ourselves in the foot on that one.  We’ve put exorbitant intact animal fees in there, so now all the BYBs are breeding to recoup the money, and the reputable breeders aren’t sure they’re going to be able to continue with the added hardship.  If you think its a hypothetical, I truly hope so, but experience indicates otherwise.

But but but…!  Why does anybody need to own a breeder dog anyway?  Short of wanting to do any licensed sports, short of wanting good dogs to start a breeding program, short of demanding a health guarantee and sensible contract, short of ego and greed and… where was I going?  Oh yeah, why own a breeder dog?

Because it is our choice.  If someone wants to go through the trouble of tracking down a good breeder and going through all the interrogation to get on their waiting list, nobody should desire to stop them. Right now, somebody is mustering this argument:

“Well, if you really just want a good pet, why can’t you be just as happy with rescuing a shelter dog?  If you truly loved dogs, it wouldn’t matter.”

To that, I reply with another quote, from our good friend, Ingrid Newkirk of PeTA:

“People who genuinely care about dogs won’t be affected by a ban on pits. They can go to the shelter and save one of the countless other breeds and lovable mutts sitting on death row through no fault of their own.”

(No, she didn’t just go there!)

Yes, I did.  I compared eliminating breeders to eliminating the breed.  Without one, we can’t have the other.  Even if we only manage to thoroughly discourage all the decent breeders, the breed falls in the hands of the BYBers, and what will we have then?  Will it even be worth preserving?  Would you want to own it?  I wouldn’t.  If that makes me selfish and egotistical, so be it.  I will live with those labels.  My interest lies with preserving the breed over preserving individual dogs, so I need to have a little bit of ego to be here I s’pose.

Or maybe its just a side effect of living with outstanding dogs.  Perhaps its like a fungus infecting my brain.  Either way, I will fight to defend my right to have my fungus until the day I have to leave the breed.  I can only hope that someday people will realize that they have no reason to be angry at me for what I do, or do deny me the satisfaction I get out of owning and working with these dogs.

by Lindsay B. (Bahamutt99)

Since I’ve heard this term used a few times by detractors, I thought it was time to talk about it.  The mention of Pit Bull-ism usually goes a little something like this:

“You Pit Bull people need to get a life.  Not everybody wants to be converted over to Pit Bull-ism.”

The angry thrust of statements like that seems to be that we are somehow trying to get everybody to embrace the breed.  It is most frequently flung around by people who have no vested interest in the issue, and frankly couldn’t care one way or another.  However, they are evidently tired of hearing from APBT defenders, and are seeking to silence us through embarassment tactics and belittlement of what we believe in.  It is highly likely that many of these people have no passions of their own, so they do not understand the motivation.

While it would be admittedly more pleasant if everybody loved Pit Bulls, the goal is not to convince folks to go out and buy a puppy.  We do not expect you to love and befriend us. Our main goal for our dogs and ourselves is equal treatment, under the law and from others.  We wish to preserve our status of innocent until proven guilty, and our due process rights which allow us to own property (including dogs) without fear of unjust persecution.  We want the same rights that most people take for granted everyday.  We seek only to keep our families intact.  If it means boycotting a company, or a state, that is a small sacrifice for the love of an exceptional canine.

To my APBT-owning compatriots, don’t let yourself be silenced.  As Martin Luther King Jr. said, “There comes a time when silence is betrayal.”

To the anti Pit Bull-ism people, put it in perspective.  Until you’ve had somebody tell you that you need to take an integral part of your home and family and cast it into the void, you will not understand what we deal with on a daily basis.  When you’ve had someone walk up and offer the unsolicited advice that your kid is ugly and they don’t trust him/her, then you’ll have some idea of what its like to love a “controversial” breed.

Again, we’re not asking for a cookie.  We don’t need you to tell us how cute our dogs are (although that is always nice).  We want respect, consideration, courtesy, equality.  We know that this is not the path of least resistance, but you shouldn’t condemn and belittle us for choosing to take it.  Resistance builds character, and our children will grow up knowing what its like to fight for something they believe in, and hopefully will enjoy life alongside our breed until they are old and grey and have children and grandchildren of their own.

by Lindsay B. (Bahamutt99)

What kind of pit do I have?

I’m writing this blog for the benefit of newcomers to the breed who may be seeking to establish what kind/breed/type of Pit Bull they have.  I think we all realize what a tricky subject this can be, especially with breeders (particularly backyard breeders) throwing around different catch phrases at whim.  Hopefully this will help clear up some of the confusion.

The “breeds” of Pit Bull:

The first thing that I usually say is that there is only one breed: the American Pit Bull Terrier (APBT).  The APBT is a pure breed recognized by the American Dog Breeders Association and the United Kennel Club.  Many people are convinced that these dogs are mixes because of their varied appearance, but the APBT has been a registered purebred since prior to 1900.  The reason for the variety is that these dogs have always been bred to perform, not conform.

Other breeds that occasionally get lumped in with the APBT under the name “pit bull” are the American Staffordshire Terrier (AmStaff) and the Staffordshire Bull Terrier (Staffybull).  Owners of these breeds usually refer to them by their respective names.  It is mainly the legislators or the uneducated who call them “pit bulls.”  They are, however, acknowledged breed cousins sharing many similar traits.  Sometimes the Bull Terrier (the egg-headed Spuds McKenzie dog of England) is referred to as a “pit bull,” but he is also his own breed.

If you have an unregistered dog, you really have to settle for a best guess.  Some hints:  APBTs are the most numerous of the breeds mentioned here.  However, it can be difficult to tell the difference between an AmStaff and an APBT, especially in the more middle-of-the-road dogs.  The Staffybull is considerably smaller than these two breeds, and shouldn’t have cropped ears.  The APBT is the only breed of the three which is allowed to have a red nose and light eyes.  All three breeds have similar temperaments.

On the subject of nicknames:

American Pit Bull Terrier owners refer to their dogs by all kinds of nicknames:  Pit, Pit Bull, APBT, bulldog, bully, pittie, etc.  Unfortunately this kind of lax labeling does lend itself to confusion since the term “pit bull” is applied by the misguided to many breeds, including those that aren’t even related to the bull breeds.  (By the way, the proper spelling of the breed name (or nickname) has only one “T.”  It is Pit Bull, not Pitt like the actor.)

“Well, I’ve got a bluenose/rednose/brindle/tricolor/merle pit!”

Many times, colors are confused with special types of APBT.  For starters, the Pit Bull nose can be any color: red, blue, liver, black, even spotted.  There is nothing in the written breed standard which gives preferance to any of the different pigment colors which abound in the breed.

On the subject of coat colors, this breed comes in a wide palette of them.  There are various shades of brindle (that beautiful, striped pattern), there is black, blue, red, fawn (aka buckskin or tan), white, piebald (white with large spots of color), smut, seal, brown, chocolate (or liver), blue fawn, tricolor, black & tan, so on and so forth.  No one color is any more valuable than another!  Every APBT is special, but beware the breeder who is touting a particular color as rare, accompanied with the usual high price tag.  (A puppy from high-quality parents who were extensively shown, worked, and health-tested will usually not cost more than $500-800, as good breeders are not looking for a return on their investment.  But that is another topic altogether.)

One recent trend is the emergence of merle as a hot new color.  Please do your research on merle dogs, as most experienced APBT people believe it is an introduced color, not one that is native to the breed.  Merle is a dominant gene which is accompanied by many defects.  The respected kennel clubs have already moved to discourage the breeding of merle dogs.

If you are interested in seeing more visual aids and information, visit http://www.apbtconformation.com/

Gator, Razor’s Edge, Gottyline, Jeep, Watchdog, Whopper, Redboy, etc etc etc.

One of the things that contributes to the confusion is people referring to their dogs as “a Jeep dog,” or “a Gottyline pit.”  This gives the novice the impression that we are talking about different breeds.  (Admittedly, some of the dogs mentioned are shrouded in controversy as to the purity of their breeding, so we may indeed be talking about different breeds.)  However, all of these are names of different bloodlines.  Or in some cases, the name of a particular dog who is considered very influential.  Occasionally people will use a kennel name in the same manner as a bloodline name, but they are not the same.  (A bloodline becomes such by producing consistent results over several generations.)  Some bloodlines are bred for performance, some for show, and some to look cool on the end of a leash.

It is first important to realize that it is impossible to determine a dog’s bloodline(s) without having a reliable pedigree to look at.  Many of these names are applied haphazardly.  It is not uncommon for backyard breeders to throw out the names of popular bloodlines in order to impress a potential buyer with the wealth of their knowledge.  Or sometimes a dog will be called after a particular bloodline even though he only has one dog of that line behind him.  Unfortunately, familiarity with reading pedigrees is something that can only be obtained with practice and exposure, and is beyond the scope of this blog.

A word about size

It has become a common practice for breeders to specialize in oversized and overweight dogs, under the impression that bigger must be better.  On the opposite end, there are some breeders focusing on extremely tiny dogs in an attempt to create “pocket pits.”  (The former is more common than the latter.)

All dogs need love, but its important to realize that you may well be supporting poor breeding practices if you buy from someone pushing “XXL pits,” or those of “superior size.”  Beware also breeders who boast about thick chests, low-stationed bodies, huge heads, females which are manlier than other kennels’ males, and the like.  This breed was never intended to be huge, and the standard describes a medium-sized dog with a preferred weight range of 30-60 pounds.  These dogs were forged as the ultimate athlete, and any attempt to exaggerate their features can only detract from the breed.  You owe it to yourself to research thoroughly if you are thinking about buying an APBT bred for any of these traits.

But, but, but…

This post was not written to discourage anyone from loving their dog for what it is, or from obtaining the kind of dog they want.  However, it is important to have a realistic view on what the APBT is and should be, especially in light of the state of the breed today.  There is a veritable kaleidoscope of colors and types available, many of which are being pumped out in staggering numbers.  The only rare APBT is the one bred by a responsible breeder who emphasizes health, proper temperament, structure, and working ability.  And the most valuable breed/color/type in the world is the one sitting next to you.

Resources:
http://www.apbtconformation.com/
http://www.akc.org/index.cfm — for AmStaff and Staffybull written standards.

by Lindsay B. (bahamutt99)

Before I launch into an opinion-loaded piece about the importance of health-testing in a breeding program, perhaps I should define what it is.

Many amateur breeders are not even aware of health-testing, or why it is important to breeding healthier dogs.  Unforunately, a lot of people are convinced that a visit to the veterinarian will tell them everything they need to know when they want to breed a litter.  A standard vet check prior to a breeding will probably include a check for parasites, maybe some bloodwork.  In the end, your vet will probably tell you that your dogs are not sick, and yes, they have a uterus and testicles so they can definitely whelp a litter.  True health-testing digs much deeper, and seeks to identify carriers of crippling and increasingly common genetic diseases that are affecting our purebred dogs.

So when I refer to health testing, I am talking about the following:

The Orthopedic Foundation for Animals (OFA) offers tests for hips, elbows, patellas (kneecaps), cardiac, thyroid, eyes, hearing, shoulders, some skin diseases, and a hip disorder commonly affecting small dogs.  They also offer DNA testing.  PennHip is another organization that offers hip testing, utilizing different methods than the OFA.

Some of these tests are very important for our breed, others not so much so.  Most would agree that hips are probably the top concern.  My opinion is that the cardiac, elbows and patellas are also important to a working breed.

At any rate, why health test the American Pit Bull Terrier?  Especially with all the contention that our breed is a healthy one?  Many breeders wont touch health-testing because they feel it is a waste of money.  Some believe that by working a dog hard, they will see everything they need to see about the genetic health of that dog.  Still others resent the implication that an organization can tell them if their dog is healthy or not.  I’ve even heard it suggested that by testing a dog, you are indicating a distrust of that dog’s breeder.  I may not be a breeder, but I am an informed puppy buyer, and I aint buying none of that.

Health-testing is a tool.  It can help us breed away from dogs carrying these diseases.  Because like it or not, admit it or not, these problems are in our breed.  They are not exclusive to one strain or type of dogs, and have affected standard-sized, hard-working dogs right alongside the big, bulky, overdone dogs.  Being bred for performance is preferable, but it is still not a “get out of jail free” card for the Pit Bull.  The working drive and pain threshold is so high in this breed that afflicted dogs may work their hearts out without ever giving any indicator that they are unsound.

When we think of dogs prone to hip dysplasia, we generally think of the German Shepherd (or GSD).  At one point, these dogs were the poster child for a world of crippling deformities.  However, by careful health testing and responsible breeding, GSD breeders have improved the quality of their hips substantially.  Since 1980, they’ve decreased their incidence of dysplastic hips by over 20%.  They now rank better than the APBT for hips, with over 8000 dogs tested.

I feel that we’ve really dropped the ball on health-testing in our breed.  I’ve heard estimates that there are up to 4 million of these dogs in the US.  Even if these numbers are grossly inflated, the registration numbers for APBTs are higher than the AKC’s registration numbers for Labrador Retrievers, which are generally considered the most popular breed in America.  For our booming population, which seems to include new breeders popping up daily, we have a mere 483 dogs tested to date for hip dysplasia.  The AmStaff (Amercian Staffordshire Terrier) people, who are generally cited as the reason for the decline of the APBTs health, have logged over 2000 dogs already tested.  Much as it may hurt my reputation to side with the AmStaffers – before any AmStaff people take offense, that’s satire – I’d say they’ve got the right idea.  At least they’re making the effort to identify the dogs who may be carrying the disease.

I am an admitted idealist.  I like to hope for the best, and I’ve got some strong notions about how I would do things if I were a breeder.  At least the ethics are already in place.  For my own edification, I had my female health-tested for several things.  I will never make that $234 back by breeding her, but I feel that if I ask her to do any work, even just the weekend weight pull, I owe it to her to make sure she’s healthy.  It just makes sense to me that someone who is adding to the gene pool should do the same thing.

A bit off the subject, but still somewhat related.  Above I mentioned that Loki’s health-testing cost $234.  That is roughly half the price of a nicely-bred puppy.  As a person who was several years ago in the position of looking for a dog — and who looked for several years before picking a breeder – I came to realize something.  I was not about to give my money to someone who didn’t health-test, because what was I paying them for?  If a person is out there showing their dogs, working their dogs, health-testing their dogs, you can see where your money goes.  However, if all somebody does is feed ‘em and breed ‘em, why should they profit from that?  I want to put my name next to a breeder who is striving to improve the breed, not just add more to its population.

Here are some numbers I’d like to throw out there for those who still aren’t sure about health-testing.  These numbers are current as of the writing of this blog.  Source for the health stats:  http://www.offa.org/

The APBT ranks 27th out of 142 breeds for hip dysplasia.  22.2% of our breed is dysplastic, versus only  4.8% excellent.  The rate of dysplastic hips is up more than 7% since 1990.  (The AmStaff’s percentage of hip dysplasia dropped 9% during that same period.)

The APBT ranks 15th out of 82 breeds for elbow dysplasia.  14% of tested dogs are dysplastic.

In a poll of 3 Pit Bull internet forums, 88% consider health-testing to be “very important” to a breeding program.

These numbers speak volumes to me.  200K new registrations per year, a whopping 483 dogs screened for hip dysplasia.  22.2% dysplastic.  We can breed better dogs than that.  I feel we owe it to the breed, especially if we don’t want to see them become just another show breed with all the inherent problems.  But you can’t breed away from these problems if you don’t know they’re there.  Like I said, health-testing is a tool.  And you can’t build anything without the right tools.

Lindsay & Loki - OFA hips/elbows/patellas, CERF

by Lindsay B. (Bahamutt99)

When it comes down to it, the APBT is still ultimately a working breed.  (He is out-of-place amid the other terriers, and no dog can work like a well-bred bulldawg.)  My idea of a working dog goes beyond the handful of breeds shown in the AKC’s working group, and doesn’t even include some of them.  I believe a working breed is any dog bred in the past to perform a challenging physical task, and can still be expected to reasonably perform in the present. Suffice it to say that when I’m talking about working dogs in this piece, I refer to dogs that still posess the drive, ability, and desire to work.

Lots of people around where I live own working dogs.  They are attracted to the size, power, energy, loyalty, whatever. But here’s the kicker: Very few people work those working dogs.

I don’t think I am made to understand what drives some people to obtain certain breeds, or a dog at all for that matter.  When we hear somebody say they own a horse, we usually assume they ride.  When a person owns a working breed, why is it a foreign concept that they work them?  The concept of dog ownership for too many people involves little more than feeding it.  They don’t think beyond those cute puppy eyes to the root of what that dog was bred to do.

Perhaps a quick definition is in order.  By work, I am not suggesting that everybody do what I do with my dog.  Work is simply a job for the dog.  Sometimes that amounts to little more than good exercise — playing frisbee or fetch, or jogging — but in the dog’s mind, it is still doing good work for the boss.

Loki and I tend to attract stares whenever we go to work.  It doesn’t matter if I’m biking with her, doing an obedience session, doing pull training with the drag sled, or just having some fun with the flirtpole.  The concept that a dog do something is so foreign that the reaction is much the same as if a UFO had just landed in my yard.  What’s wrong?  Haven’t you ever seen a fat white chick bellowing at her Pit Bull as it pulls a weighted sled across the yard before?  Don’t answer that.

The more curious folks will sometimes come up and ask pertinent questions like “Doesn’t that make her mean?” or “Are you training her to fight?” or “My cousins baby daddy has a Pit Bull.  Wanna mate ‘em?”  And occasionally even fanciful queries like “What are you doing?”  I always try to educate, even at those times when I’m panting more than my dog.  I wonder how many of the people I talk to go home and tell their family about the crazy lady abusing her dog.

Have we really become that far removed from the old partnerships?  Do people really think that a dog is nothing but a furry trash compactor?  Do you think that shepherd, collie, terrier, husky, retriever, etc., is happy being a yardpiece?  Maybe with enough time the numbing certainty that he will never learn anything new will set in and he will become complacent.  Or maybe that barking/chewing/digging/nipping/chasing problem you have is simply a result of the poor beast wanting a job to do, and having to come up with its own.  Give your dog something to do, and he wont have time to get bored and dig in the trash.  Chances are if you’re working him sufficiently, he’ll be tired and go to sleep, an instant transformation into “good dog.”  The people who think I’m abusing my dog by working her never seem to grasp the idea that they could be doing their dog a disservice by not working them.

I personally believe that dogs who engage in some regular activity are smarter and healthier than your average couch spud.  (It certainly applies to humans.)  When people look at pics of my dog, or lay hands on her, they usually comment on her fitness.  (She’s not as conditioned as a true working dog would be, but we’re just “weekend warriors” after all.)  My reply is usually that she didn’t get that way without some work on my part.  They also tend to comment on her good behavior, and I believe the two go hand in hand.  It is a rare and lucky person who ends up with a dog that keeps itself both fit and occupied.  Most of us have to work at it.  But the payback is well worth the effort.

Why are you still on your computer?  Get out there and work those dogs!

by Lindsay B. (Bahamutt99)

I’ve been called a tyrant and a control freak. A typical morning has me checking to make sure my gate is locked before letting my dog out, and ensuring that her ID tags are still on her collar. If she spends more than 2 or 3 minutes out there by herself, I start to get antsy. I don’t let her play with her neighbor friends without my direct supervision, and I don’t leave her alone with other animals if I am not home. She has to do sits before she goes outside, and for her dinner. If we are eating dinner in the living room, she has a designated pillow to go to, and she is not allowed to beg tidbits. I’ve been known to take something she is chewing on just to test her response. Occasionally we play control games, where I will put down her dinner, or set a cookie in front of her nose, and she is not to touch it until I release her. When we play tug, I train the “out” at the same time, and she knows to obey it. If she takes a cookie, teeth are not allowed to touch skin.

So why the need for such a strict lifestyle? I own Pit Bulls. I understand that if my dog gets out of line, the long arm of the law will snatch her up more quickly than a breed of cuddlier repute. A Pit Bull scratching somebody on the leg rapidly becomes an “attack,” wheras people have been known to laugh off full-blown attacks by less controversial breeds. (Come on. Tell me you wouldn’t laugh if a 5-pound teacup Cockadoodle-poo came flying out at you and made an attempt on your pants leg.) Whether you see that as sad, funny or unjust, it is the truth that we are faced with. In the words of the immortal Judge Mills Lane, “some dogs can really get it on.” (He owned an Akita.) That doesn’t make our dogs evil. But it does mean that your neighbor, relative, friend, etc. will be watching your dog more closely than they would watch the local Labradork. I try to make sure they never see anything alarming in my dog. (Barking? Growling? Knocking people over? No sir, not my dog. Move along. Nothing to see here.)

I’ve also heard the argument from certain sectors in the Pit Bull community that by teaching my dog how to behave in modern society, I’m making my dog into something else, something that isn’t a Pit Bull. Are you laughing yet? Or perhaps crying? My sense of the ridiculous really starts to twitch when purported advocates of the breed feel that the APBT shouldn’t be taught manners, that if it is not frothing to take pieces out of another dog, it is lacking something vital to the breed. Well let me assure you, stupidity was never vital to anybody. If my dog regularly clothes-lines herself on the end of the leash in a kamikaze dash to get at other dogs, that is stupid. Now don’t get me wrong, I like fire as much as the next person, but it can and should be controlled when the situation calls for it. Anybody who tells you that a dog is ruined by obedience training is either grossly misinformed or pseudo-macho and insecure. I can only hope that the people who feel that way about the breed are keeping their dogs behind locked doors.

Maybe I am a control freak. Maybe by insisting that my dog walk nicely on a leash, I am really depriving her of her rights as a canine citizen to run and be free. But I don’t like living next door to an untrained dog, and I can only assume that my neighbors wouldn’t appreciate living next door to an untrained Pit Bull. More and more places are closing their doors to the American Pit Bull Terrier (and any dog that remotely looks like it). If we are lucky, when BSL comes to town, we get off with having to buy a hefty insurance policy and build a kennel that costs more than my car. It comes down to weighing my dog’s pleasure in being a total goofball to the pleasure I get from owning the breed. Without the breed, there would be no goofball, and you wouldn’t be reading this right now. I’ll just have to put up with ruling my dog with an iron fist for the time being.