''Pits'', dominance, and training

Description of your first forum.

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by Jonathan Ree » Tue, 31 Oct 2000 11:11:27



Hi,

I'm interested in the "Pit" Bull Terrier breeds (American Safforshire,
American Pit Bull, Saffordshire Bull). However, I have several questions.

First of all, I know they where origionally bred to be dog-aggressive, but
what about this "high prey drive" thing I keep hearing about? Pits where not
hunting dogs... so did they get it from an ancestor (terrier?), or is that a
load of doggie-pooh spread around by unknowing people trying to explane why
the dogs are "viciose"?

Also. It's my understanding that terriers are *** (please correct me if
I'm wrong). Are the Bull Terrier breeds this way? None of the "Pits" I know
are like that.... hmm. Something to ponder on ^_~

I've heard Clicker Training is best for these kinds of dogs... but what
about ***? I don't know much about clicker training, it seems though
that instead of teaching the dog it should listen to you because you are in
charge, it teaches the dog to listen to you because... because... it's
rewarded when it does? Ummm, I'm not totally sure on that. But I am sure
that if I had a big strong dog like a AmStaff or Pit Bull Terrier, I'd feel
a *lot* better knowing the dog respects me as a "higher power". For those of
you who use clicker training and other new training methods, do you think
non-*** acts of *** (ie: not letting the dog on bed, going ahead
of the dog/making the dog sit-sta before giving the dog anything, etc) would
work along with the clicker training?

And although I am not planing to get a dog at the moment (I would love to
eventually own one), something has been bothering me for a while. Is it a
better idea to adopt a "pit" puppy, make sure it's from a reputable breeder
and from a line that's known to be frienfly and non-dog aggressive, do lots
of obediance training, socialization, and hope for the best- OR get an ***
dog who's already known to be dog-friendly? Both have there pros and cons...
~sigh~

Final question. Just because the dog is dog-aggressive, does that mean it's
likely to also be aggressive with other animals?

Thank you for your time!

Renee Reed
PS: Sorry for my poor spelling...

 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by Rober » Tue, 31 Oct 2000 20:26:59


Quote:
> I'm interested in the "Pit" Bull Terrier breeds (American Safforshire,
> American Pit Bull, Saffordshire Bull). However, I have several questions.
> First of all, I know they where origionally bred to be dog-aggressive, but
> what about this "high prey drive" thing I keep hearing about? Pits where
not
> hunting dogs... so did they get it from an ancestor (terrier?), or is that
a
> load of doggie-pooh spread around by unknowing people trying to explane
why
> the dogs are "viciose"?

You seem to be an open minded guy!
The breed is primarly from the Bulldog (The orginal, who now do not excist)
and from The English White Terrier. (Does not excist any more)

The Terriers used was many different kinds, from different parts of th UK.
Each had their own prey drive. Some where good as pointers, some was good to
catch small animals, and some to catch bigger animals.

All these dogs was mixed with the old bulldoge.
They were mixed to get the ultimat dog, The strenght of the bulldog, and the
speed and "prey-drive" of the terrier.

The reason the dogs have been fought in pits is to get the dog that never
gives up, and mix him with the other dog who never gives up.
This is for most people too much dog. (Pitbull-Performance bred)
But they are really nice dogs!

Quote:
> Also. It's my understanding that terriers are *** (please correct me
if
> I'm wrong). Are the Bull Terrier breeds this way? None of the "Pits" I
know
> are like that.... hmm. Something to ponder on ^_~

Because of theyr HISTORY as fighting dogs, most bull/terrier mixes are
*** dogs.
Some dogs, like my ONE year old Amstaff is not ***...yet.
You should base your self of that they are ***.

Quote:
> I've heard Clicker Training is best for these kinds of dogs... but what
> about ***? I don't know much about clicker training, it seems though
> that instead of teaching the dog it should listen to you because you are
in
> charge, it teaches the dog to listen to you because... because... it's
> rewarded when it does? Ummm, I'm not totally sure on that. But I am sure
> that if I had a big strong dog like a AmStaff or Pit Bull Terrier, I'd
feel
> a *lot* better knowing the dog respects me as a "higher power". For those
of
> you who use clicker training and other new training methods, do you think
> non-*** acts of *** (ie: not letting the dog on bed, going ahead
> of the dog/making the dog sit-sta before giving the dog anything, etc)
would
> work along with the clicker training?

When the dog is a puppy, let it be a puppy -No Training.
When about 4-5 months old, you can start the training.
The most important thing, IF the dog does not bother to learn, you have to
make sure the dog see you as the leader.
Then it goes better.
The Pit/Staff have terrier *** in them, and every one knows how theese
dogs are.
They only do things when THEY want to.
So it a lot ow working to be done.

Quote:
> And although I am not planing to get a dog at the moment (I would love to
> eventually own one), something has been bothering me for a while. Is it a
> better idea to adopt a "pit" puppy, make sure it's from a reputable
breeder
> and from a line that's known to be frienfly and non-dog aggressive, do
lots
> of obediance training, socialization, and hope for the best- OR get an
***
> dog who's already known to be dog-friendly? Both have there pros and
cons...
> ~sigh~

If we had rescue dogs of Amstaffs/Pits in Norway, I would adopt one.
Many dogs die because they are neglected. There are ALOT of good dogs at
shelters.
Go for it.
Find the dog that match for you.
Dogs get killed every day at shelters.

Quote:
> Final question. Just because the dog is dog-aggressive, does that mean
it's
> likely to also be aggressive with other animals?

Other animals, it is here the instinct comes. If there is alot of Terrier in
the dog, it will hunt.
But mostly it is how you learn the dog how to act.
If you have other animals, you should get a pupy, NOT FROM A PUPPY FACTORY.
Get it from a known respected breeder. Look at ads in Amstaff magasines, or
on the
amstaff network, under breeders directory.
The Amstaff would be good for you.

Quote:
> Thank you for your time!

Ok.
If you have other private questons
mail me at:

Quote:
> Renee Reed
> PS: Sorry for my poor spelling...

Robert Hughes
Norway.
 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by Rober » Tue, 31 Oct 2000 20:29:55


AND FOR EVERY ONE.
INFO:
PITS/AMSTAFFS/BULLTERRIER/STAFFBULLS
ARE NOT VISCIOUS,BAD ANIMALS.
THEY ARE LOVLY LOVING ANIMALS.


Quote:
> > I'm interested in the "Pit" Bull Terrier breeds (American Safforshire,
> > American Pit Bull, Saffordshire Bull). However, I have several
questions.
> > First of all, I know they where origionally bred to be dog-aggressive,
but
> > what about this "high prey drive" thing I keep hearing about? Pits where
> not
> > hunting dogs... so did they get it from an ancestor (terrier?), or is
that
> a
> > load of doggie-pooh spread around by unknowing people trying to explane
> why
> > the dogs are "viciose"?

> You seem to be an open minded guy!
> The breed is primarly from the Bulldog (The orginal, who now do not
excist)
> and from The English White Terrier. (Does not excist any more)

> The Terriers used was many different kinds, from different parts of th UK.
> Each had their own prey drive. Some where good as pointers, some was good
to
> catch small animals, and some to catch bigger animals.

> All these dogs was mixed with the old bulldoge.
> They were mixed to get the ultimat dog, The strenght of the bulldog, and
the
> speed and "prey-drive" of the terrier.

> The reason the dogs have been fought in pits is to get the dog that never
> gives up, and mix him with the other dog who never gives up.
> This is for most people too much dog. (Pitbull-Performance bred)
> But they are really nice dogs!

> > Also. It's my understanding that terriers are *** (please correct
me
> if
> > I'm wrong). Are the Bull Terrier breeds this way? None of the "Pits" I
> know
> > are like that.... hmm. Something to ponder on ^_~

> Because of theyr HISTORY as fighting dogs, most bull/terrier mixes are
> *** dogs.
> Some dogs, like my ONE year old Amstaff is not ***...yet.
> You should base your self of that they are ***.

> > I've heard Clicker Training is best for these kinds of dogs... but what
> > about ***? I don't know much about clicker training, it seems
though
> > that instead of teaching the dog it should listen to you because you are
> in
> > charge, it teaches the dog to listen to you because... because... it's
> > rewarded when it does? Ummm, I'm not totally sure on that. But I am sure
> > that if I had a big strong dog like a AmStaff or Pit Bull Terrier, I'd
> feel
> > a *lot* better knowing the dog respects me as a "higher power". For
those
> of
> > you who use clicker training and other new training methods, do you
think
> > non-*** acts of *** (ie: not letting the dog on bed, going
ahead
> > of the dog/making the dog sit-sta before giving the dog anything, etc)
> would
> > work along with the clicker training?

> When the dog is a puppy, let it be a puppy -No Training.
> When about 4-5 months old, you can start the training.
> The most important thing, IF the dog does not bother to learn, you have to
> make sure the dog see you as the leader.
> Then it goes better.
> The Pit/Staff have terrier *** in them, and every one knows how theese
> dogs are.
> They only do things when THEY want to.
> So it a lot ow working to be done.

> > And although I am not planing to get a dog at the moment (I would love
to
> > eventually own one), something has been bothering me for a while. Is it
a
> > better idea to adopt a "pit" puppy, make sure it's from a reputable
> breeder
> > and from a line that's known to be frienfly and non-dog aggressive, do
> lots
> > of obediance training, socialization, and hope for the best- OR get an
> ***
> > dog who's already known to be dog-friendly? Both have there pros and
> cons...
> > ~sigh~

> If we had rescue dogs of Amstaffs/Pits in Norway, I would adopt one.
> Many dogs die because they are neglected. There are ALOT of good dogs at
> shelters.
> Go for it.
> Find the dog that match for you.
> Dogs get killed every day at shelters.

> > Final question. Just because the dog is dog-aggressive, does that mean
> it's
> > likely to also be aggressive with other animals?

> Other animals, it is here the instinct comes. If there is alot of Terrier
in
> the dog, it will hunt.
> But mostly it is how you learn the dog how to act.
> If you have other animals, you should get a pupy, NOT FROM A PUPPY
FACTORY.
> Get it from a known respected breeder. Look at ads in Amstaff magasines,
or
> on the
> amstaff network, under breeders directory.
> The Amstaff would be good for you.

> > Thank you for your time!
> Ok.
> If you have other private questons
> mail me at:

> > Renee Reed
> > PS: Sorry for my poor spelling...

> Robert Hughes
> Norway.

 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by Kepyta » Tue, 31 Oct 2000 22:36:19


I agree with everything except the training..
I would start on small things from the day you bring your new puppy home..
(esp like the potty training...  :)  just like you start teaching him to
come when called, teach him to sit when he gets to you (helps TONS to keep
him from jumping on people)..

basically just teach polite manners from the beginning.. and socialize
socialize socialize..   take him everywhere and let him meet as ;many people
as possible..  do it while he's small and cute and everyone is glad to make
friends with the cute little baby..  if the people where you live are like
the people here, they will run in terror when he is older as soon as they
hear the words "pit bull"   but, if your dog is an outstanding good citizen,
he will be an ambassador for his breed and hopefully help to end some of
this hysteria..  if even one person realizes that not all pitbulls are
killers, then both of you have accomplilshed something great..

about the ***..   my Loki is a Australian Shepherd/pit-mix cross...
aka a mutt.. :)  he is the sweetest most over-sized baby in the world..  he
is ALSO pig-headed, stubborn, pushy, and sneaky and way to smart for my own
good..   he invents new ways to get into trouble and if he thinks there is
even a chance of you backing down, he will try to walk all over you..

just my own experience..

dainerra

 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by John F Richards » Wed, 01 Nov 2000 04:01:55


Quote:
Robert writes:

:Because of theyr HISTORY as
:fighting dogs, most bull/terrier
:mixes are *** dogs.

No, they aren't.

First, their history as fighting
dogs has made them very tolerant
of handling by humans.

As for their behavior with other
dogs, they were bred for gameness
rather than for aggression per se.
The difference is approximately
that between willingness to finish
a fight once one starts vs willingness
to start fights or simply attack.
The breed is actually quite variable
re aggression in the above sense.
It is also variable re gameness,
but the biggest problem people
keep getting into generally is
NOT that their dog is constantly
picking fights and attacking dogs,
but that a dog that has never shown
any aggression before got into a
fight that the owners were helpless
to stop.

In any event, none of this has anything
to do with *** per se.

JohnR
Pit Bull Libertarian

Never sneer at the power of a little
pink squeaky toy!

 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by emil.. » Wed, 01 Nov 2000 04:07:32


There're only about 200 books/videos on dog training and about 20 on the
various "bull breeds".  You'd do better to go to your local library and
see what they have there.  Start reading up now!

Your questions are WAY too broad to be answered effectively on an
Internet group like this.  There are some great websites with good basic
information you need to read first.Here's just one you must read:
http://www.nyx.net/~mbur/apbt.html
This is the "FAQ" for the rpd newsgroups like the one you're posting to.
http://www.k9web.com/dog-faqs/

Emily (not ~Emily)

Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by Rober » Wed, 01 Nov 2000 04:47:50


The males sure are ***!
If it is not ***, it is wery soft lines used in the dogs.
I have NEVER Written that the *** is pointing to the humans.
The dogs are mostly not agressive.
They have NEVER been bred to be agressive.
Robert.



Quote:
> Robert writes:

> :Because of theyr HISTORY as
> :fighting dogs, most bull/terrier
> :mixes are *** dogs.

> No, they aren't.

> First, their history as fighting
> dogs has made them very tolerant
> of handling by humans.

> As for their behavior with other
> dogs, they were bred for gameness
> rather than for aggression per se.
> The difference is approximately
> that between willingness to finish
> a fight once one starts vs willingness
> to start fights or simply attack.
> The breed is actually quite variable
> re aggression in the above sense.
> It is also variable re gameness,
> but the biggest problem people
> keep getting into generally is
> NOT that their dog is constantly
> picking fights and attacking dogs,
> but that a dog that has never shown
> any aggression before got into a
> fight that the owners were helpless
> to stop.

> In any event, none of this has anything
> to do with *** per se.

> JohnR
> Pit Bull Libertarian

> Never sneer at the power of a little
> pink squeaky toy!

 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by Jemma Jamaic » Wed, 01 Nov 2000 05:56:06



Quote:
> First, their history as fighting
> dogs has made them very tolerant
> of handling by humans.

Exactly right. While researching my Bull Terrier's roots, I came across the
standards set by Mr. James Hinks, the pioneer.

From Martin Weil's, "Bull Terrier":

"One unusual by-product of the sporting origins of the Bull Terrier is that
a dog had to be developed that was not only unusually strong, fast,
thoroughly game, and able to think for itself in an emergency, but which at
the same time, though injured in a match, would not, even in pain, turn on
it's master.  This latter characteristic makes the breed unusually reliable
with children, whose often unmerciful mauling would cause a less friendly
dog to snap.  When the Bull Terrier's patience is tried beyond bounds, his
reaction is to get up and move."

I would guess (certainly in my experience anyway) that much of that applies
to the other Bull-and-Terrier breeds as well.

Quote:
> As for their behavior with other
> dogs, they were bred for gameness
> rather than for aggression per se.

I agree with that also.  Dog aggression is more a factor of variables like
training, gender combinations, *** issues, formative handling,
exposure to stimulus, individual temperaments, and breeding rather than the
'breeds' as a whole.  A well bred APBT, for example, is no more or less
likely to be dog aggressive than a Toy Pom, a Jack Russell, or a Beagle
(just to throw out some breeds). Gameness shouldn't be confused with
viciousness.

IMHO anyway,

~Jamaica

 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by Jonathan Ree » Wed, 01 Nov 2000 08:44:53


Thank you all who replied! I apreciate it.

Renee Reed

 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by Trailblazer1 » Wed, 01 Nov 2000 13:30:25


   OK, I know that a pit is one of the least likely dogs to bite a human - but
what about dog-to-dog aggression?   I would like to say outright that I'm in
the "consideration" stage of obtaining a second dog.   Bonnie seems to really
enjoy boxers and pit bulls - they play like she does - lots of "boxing",
wrestling, sparring... most normal dogs are put off by this.
   I am looking very seriously at an Amstaff or pit bull because I want a
medium sized, short coated dog with great athletic ability, intelligence,
stamina, and a dog that is very active but not loopy - ie it won't pace for
hours in the house on the days I'm not outside.  I do a lot of outdoor stuff -
kayaking, hiking, biking, horseback riding, skiing, etc.   Bonnie does it with
me except the horse stuff and skiing (she tends to bumble into the horses'
legs).   Versatility is the key - a dog who can go on therapy visits, do
agility and flyball, obedience, drafting.
    How can I prevent dog-to-dog problems with Bonnie and another dog?  I don't
want her to be constantly dominated and beat up by a dog that is larger,
stronger, and more agile than she is.   I'd definitely be starting out with a
puppy.
   An unrelated question - in most cropped breeds, the ears are done at 2-3
months of age.  When are Amstaffs cropped?  I want a dog with ears!

Jana
 &Bonnie

 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by Lynn Kosmako » Wed, 01 Nov 2000 17:34:13


Quote:

>     How can I prevent dog-to-dog problems with Bonnie and another dog?  I don't
> want her to be constantly dominated and beat up by a dog that is larger,
> stronger, and more agile than she is.   I'd definitely be starting out with a puppy.

Honestly?  If I were considering adding a pit bull to a household
with a resident dog, I'd go with an *** pit, not a puppy.  Many
pit bulls are just great with other dogs, but I've seen a number of
pups that became dog aggressive as they grew up.  With a young ***
you'd be able to test and know before bringing the dog into your home.

Lynn K.

 
 
 

''Pits'', dominance, and training

Post by BELLESHI » Wed, 01 Nov 2000 22:35:46


Quote:

>Robert writes:
>Because of theyr HISTORY as
>:fighting dogs, most bull/terrier
>:mixes are *** dogs.

>No, they aren't.

     I agree, Belle (5yr old fs) is a fairly *** dog, a real
people-pleaser.

Quote:

>First, their history as fighting
>dogs has made them very tolerant
>of handling by humans.

     Absolutely--would you want to fight a dog you couldn't handle? (Well, I'm
sure there are some morons who would...)

Quote:
>As for their behavior with other
>dogs, they were bred for gameness
>rather than for aggression per se.
>The difference is approximately
>that between willingness to finish
>a fight once one starts vs willingness
>to start fights or simply attack.

     This is the attitude exactly of my pit. She is willing to introduce
herself to other dogs, wait patiently while they "***sniff" <g>, and engage
in play if they are friendly and let her smell them back. If they are
aggressive toward her when she attempts to become acquainted, she will respond
aggresively. She truly seems to enjoy the company of other dogs, but many dogs
don't seem to enjoy her. The problem is that most other owners instantly blame
her for a scuffle, ignoring the fact that their dog started it!
     In defense of other dogs, I do notice that she is very animated and wild
in her play. She may be just too "in your face" for many other dogs. I watch a
strange dog enter the yard while she is outside and she is always friendly.
Usually the other dog leaves, tho', because she makes such a fool of herself
leaping about, play bowing, and running around them like a nut!
If they respond aggresively, however, they leave rather quickly <g>.  

belleshine