Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Description of your first forum.

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Robin Coo » Wed, 10 Jul 1996 04:00:00



I did not say, the US government santioned any kennel clubs, the AKC is
the officially recognized kennel club in the US by the majority of the
people.

I never said I despised UKC, I simply was stating the differences between
the kennel clubs, did you know the UKC used to register rabbits and
goats?  Also, I have a Am Staff that is dual registered as a pit bull and
I championed her last year at two weekends when she was just 6 months old
and on her first day she took Best in Show.  So no, I do not DESPISE the
UKC, people just need to get educated on the differences between the Am
Staff and Pit Bull. When they split 60 or so years ago, they became two
different breeds.

Once again, I did not call pit bulls a mixed breed and if I did, I did
not realize it.  What I was trying to say was, that people are all the
time registering so-called pit bulls. This means that in the past I have
known of many people that have  gotten dogs from the pound that LOOK LIKE
pit bulls so they think they should register it and they do. (I even know
a person that has a bar stool that they registered as a pit bull) Then
people like this breed and breed.  I'm sure you know the type!

----------------Robin----------------------------

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Cindy Tittle Moo » Wed, 10 Jul 1996 04:00:00


Quote:

>I did not say, the US government santioned any kennel clubs, the AKC is
>the officially recognized kennel club in the US by the majority of the
>people.

Using "officially" above is totally nonesensical.  Official by whom?
By what?  Gosh, company X sells the MOST cars in the US, does that make
their cars the "official" car of the US?  No.  The AKC may be the largest
dog registry in the US, but that confers no additional merit on it.

Quote:
>I never said I despised UKC, I simply was stating the differences between
>the kennel clubs, did you know the UKC used to register rabbits and
>goats?  

You weren't even correct about the purported differences.  Also, the
AKC used to not require neutering of the ILP dogs.  So?

Quote:
>Once again, I did not call pit bulls a mixed breed and if I did, I did
>not realize it.  

You refered to them as "so called pit bulls"  -- it certainly sounded
like that's what you were doing, denying thatpits were a breed at all.
Thank you for the explanation.

Quote:
>time registering so-called pit bulls. This means that in the past I have
>known of many people that have  gotten dogs from the pound that LOOK LIKE
>pit bulls so they think they should register it and they do. (I even know
>a person that has a bar stool that they registered as a pit bull) Then
>people like this breed and breed.  I'm sure you know the type!

With the UKC?  To register a dog as a certain breed with the UKC, if
its parents were not registered withthem, you have to provide evidence
from another registry: AKC, CKC, etc.  If you don't have this, then
you can use the LP program-- which requires the animal to be neutered,
removing its offspring (should you lie about that) from further
consideration by the UKC.  You can cheat...  you can do the same with
the AKC, though.  Lie about the sire/dam so the pups are registered?
I've seen that in the AKC.

--Cindy
--

   WAGGERY   U-CD Terrell's Chocolate Deduction CGC CD--Hershe   LABRADORS
   -------      Delby's Wood Nymph at Waggery WC CGC--Angel      ---------

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Robin Coo » Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:00:00


Quote:

> >I never said I despised UKC, I simply was stating the differences between
> >the kennel clubs, did you know the UKC used to register rabbits and
> >goats?

> You weren't even correct about the purported differences.

What? I got some of my info straight from the AKC page and straight
from the UKC page!

Quote:
> With the UKC? To register a dog as a certain breed with the UKC, if
> its parents were not registered withthem, you have to provide evidence
> from another registry: AKC, CKC, etc

This is not true. Just ONE example: I have a friend that has a pit bull.
 She never got her papers (or lost them, never can get the story
straight).  She wanted to UKC register her pit bull so she called the
local person that checks out the dogs for the UKC. She said all she
needed was 9 pictures of the dog, that her tail not be cut, and wanted to
know if she knew who the sire and dam were. The lady came down, they took
pictures together and my friend told her sho the sire and dam were, and
the representative approved her *** as an American Pit Bull Terrier and
she now has FULL registration.

---Robin------

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Cindy Tittle Moo » Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:00:00


Quote:


>> >I never said I despised UKC, I simply was stating the differences between
>> >the kennel clubs, did you know the UKC used to register rabbits and
>> >goats?

>> You weren't even correct about the purported differences.
>What? I got some of my info straight from the AKC page and straight
>from the UKC page!

Just becasue the UKC was founded by a single individual does not
mean that it is still being run by that individual (if nothing else,
it'd be impossible).  The UKC has member clubs and delegates.  I'll
review the faq (which is NOT an authoritative document to appeal
to, I make that quite clear in the first paragraph.

As for your story, well it's entertaining.  I've heard similar stories
for the AKC, so it still does not impress me one way or another.
The UKC has implmented a DNA verification program that is reflected
in their pedigrees.  Now that beats anything the AKC has got as far
as proving their stud books.

But my original point is getting lost in all of this.  You were trying
to claim that the AKC is the official dog registry in the United
States, and I've challenged you on that claim.  Nothing you have said
so far backs you up.  Nothing makes the AKC official.  As for which
registry is "better" -- that is a matter of personal opinion.

You believe the AKC is better, that's fine.  Don't try to use your
opinion to somehow make it the "official" club, though.  As for my
opinion, I see strengths and weaknesses in both the AKC and the UKC.
Each has programs or policies that I wish the other had.  I see
nothing in either of them that designates either as "official".  The
US simply does not have an official dog registry or official kennel
club.  Canada and the UK do, but not the US.

--Cindy
--

   WAGGERY   U-CD Terrell's Chocolate Deduction CGC CD--Hershe   LABRADORS
   -------      Delby's Wood Nymph at Waggery WC CGC--Angel      ---------

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Onewai » Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:00:00



Quote:
Moore) writes:
>You believe the AKC is better, that's fine.  Don't try to use your
>opinion to somehow make it the "official" club, though.  As for my
>opinion, I see strengths and weaknesses in both the AKC and the UKC.
>Each has programs or policies that I wish the other had.  I see
>nothing in either of them that designates either as "official".  The
>US simply does not have an official dog registry or official kennel
>club.  Canada and the UK do, but not the US.

Hi Cindy,

   Could Robin possibly mean that AKC is "official" insofar as it is the
only American registry that FCI has any kind of working relationship with.
It still doesn't make AKC "official" but it's something... (???)

Karen C.


"You have no power here! Be gone! Before somebody drops a house on you,
too..."

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Robin Coo » Thu, 11 Jul 1996 04:00:00


Quote:

> Just becasue the UKC was founded by a single individual does not
> mean that it is still being run by that individual (if nothing else,
> it'd be impossible).  The UKC has member clubs and delegates.

The UKC is a privately owned business.  It is owned by a person and he
profits from it.  The UKC just "recognized" 74 new breeds, a lot of which
I find it hard to believe UKC is even recognizing them (such as the black
mouth CUR). I think it is mighty odd that so many of these breeds are not
from this country.  Their own country's registries won't recognize them
but UKC will.

Quote:
>As for my
> opinion, I see strengths and weaknesses in both the AKC and the UKC.
> Each has programs or policies that I wish the other had.  I see
> nothing in either of them that designates either as "official".  The
> US simply does not have an official dog registry or official kennel
> club.  Canada and the UK do, but not the US.

I'm sorry but the AKC is known as the Official kennel club for the USA.
In the courts and in the government, if there is a question on
something having to do with dogs - the AKC is the kennel club referred
too.

Robin

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Carl Semenc » Fri, 12 Jul 1996 04:00:00


Quote:
>I find it hard to believe UKC is even recognizing them (such as the black
>mouth CUR). I think it is mighty odd that so many of these breeds are not
>from this country.  Their own country's registries won't recognize them  
>but UKC will.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Should anyone like to see a picture of a Yellow Black Mouthed Cur Dog, a
native, American, purebred, working dog, go to the following url:

http://www.moonsgarden.com/~***cic/curdog.gif

This is one of the Cur Dogs that belongs to an aquaintance of mine,
Detective Jerry Briffa of Brooklyn, NYC. I believe it was Howard Carnathan
who bred this dog.

Photo by be and, not that it's any good, all rights reserved.

Mind you, Old Yella was a Cur Dog. It's about time the UKC registered
these.
--

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by bkyv.. » Fri, 12 Jul 1996 04:00:00


  Do you mean Old Yeller of the Disney movie?  We always wondered
what kind of dog he was because our cousin had one when she was
a kid about 35 years ago that looked very similar to him.  What
breeds does the cur dog consist of?  Thanks.  Jeanie

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Carl Semenc » Fri, 12 Jul 1996 04:00:00


On Jul 11, 1996 08:17:20 in article <Re: Black Mouthed Cur Dog>,

Quote:

>What
>breeds does the cur dog consist of?

Bones, guts, muscle, *** and fur.

Just kidding. Yes, I mean "Old Yella" or "Yeller" or however they spelled
it. Remember in the Disney movie how specific they were in describing what
a "real" Cur dog should look like with the black mouth and the ability to
withstand pain and what not? Well, this is because there is a very specific
type of dog that has existed down south for next to ever that has long
since been given the name Black Mouth Cur or Yellow Black Mouth Cur, or
simply the"Cur Dog". They are a great, hard working dog. There is a natural
"bobtail" strain among them too.

I must tell you that these can be very hard dogs and while they are great
in the right situation you don't want one*** around your city
apartment or in the suburbs or wherever. There's something in me that's
glad that the UKC has decided to register these dogs, if this is true, but
there's something in me that worries that there is no way the show ring and
those who frequent dog shows can handle a proper cur dog unless they
lobotomize the breed, as  show breeders have so many other breeds. It would
be a shame to render the old Cur Dog useless.

                                                 Carl

--

http://www.moonsgarden.com/~***cic/

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Bryan Hink » Fri, 12 Jul 1996 04:00:00


: The UKC is a privately owned business.  It is owned by a person and he
: profits from it.  The UKC just "recognized" 74 new breeds, a lot of which
: I find it hard to believe UKC is even recognizing them (such as the black
: mouth CUR). I think it is mighty odd that so many of these breeds are not
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^
: from this country.  Their own country's registries won't recognize them
: but UKC will.

    Ok I've stayed out of all the ***being spewed for quite a long
time here......gratuitous insult first

 ROBIN...you are a snotnosed ,supercilious ,sanctimonious TWIT who
knows very little about the origins of her own breed ( AmStaffs )
and even less about the origins of the breed that was the foundation
stock for your breed ,the APBT ...oh and as another aside the breed
known as the ...Black Mouthed Cur.....has been bred in the south for
longer than your dogs have been officially recognised by the AKC
likewise for Leopard Curs (CataHoulas) ,the Yellow Cur ,oh and hows
about a few more breeds that the AKC doesn't recognise ,Patterdale
Terriers for example of McKnabs.

 Ahh yes but back to the APBT ,the breadth and depth of your ignorance
on this subject is astounding ,and your snotty comments in reference
to the registries give short shrift to all who register and show
through the registry that is primarily responsible for keeping the
the breed closest to what it originally was ,that is the ADBA or
the American Dog Breeders Association ,opened in 1909 buy Guy McCord
purchased in '51 by Frank Ferris ( a name YOU might start looking
for in old AmStaff foundation pedigrees) and presently owned by
a long line of Greenwoods.

   Without the APBT YOU wouldn't HAVE an AmStaff and as far as that
goes the original AmStaff show standard was based around a dog known
as ..Colby's "Primo"....he was an APBT ,course Amstaffs now don't even
resemble the original dogs.

 Oh another aside here to the guy (I forget who it was) who made the
remark about Colby buying AmStaffs off the boat...BBBBZZZZTTTTT......
WRONG........the dogs bought from English and Irish immigrants on the
docks of NewburyPort Mass. were APBTs and they all across the board
were fighting dogs first and foremost and thats why Colby purchased
them ,these are among the foundation dogs for the entire breed and
for the most part were small sometimes very small dogs.

 If you wish to dispute the above I suggest you call Lou Colby up
and see how much patience he has with bovine waste.

                                             B.

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Elizabeth B. Nai » Fri, 12 Jul 1996 04:00:00


Quote:

> This is not true. Just ONE example: I have a friend that has a pit bull.
>  She never got her papers (or lost them, never can get the story
> straight).  She wanted to UKC register her pit bull so she called the
> local person that checks out the dogs for the UKC. She said all she
> needed was 9 pictures of the dog, that her tail not be cut, and wanted to
> know if she knew who the sire and dam were. The lady came down, they took
> pictures together and my friend told her sho the sire and dam were, and
> the representative approved her *** as an American Pit Bull Terrier and
> she now has FULL registration.

I know it's not the usual way it's done, but won't the AKC consider
registering a dog if you provide name and numbers of the sire and dam
(provided they themselves are AKC registered)?  There are deadlines
and other rules involved also, but it's a printed statement of the AKC
that puppy buyers are advised to get the names and numbers of the
parents (at a minimum - of course they advise you should get the
litter registration), that the AKC does not recognize 'cheaper without
papers' sales, and will at least in those cases register the dog
anyway, without the cooperation of the breeder.

So in cases where the dog's antecedents are known, it's not unheard of
to register it even without the blue slip.

Since the UKC makes a distinction between single registration and
registration where 5 generations are UKC registered, it does not seem
unreasonable for them to register an individual dog of known
parentage, if those known parents are registered or registerable in
the UKC, AKC, or a breed club that UKC recognizes for registration.
I'd be concerned about identification, but that's an issue in any
registry -- and doG knows there are fraud opportunities in the AKC.

The bar stool, now, THAT one I'd like to know which registry accepted
as an APBT!
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth B. Naime            *   Email may be forwarded and/or posted

CUR 70 / FUR 212              *       * Standard Disclaimers Apply*
------------------------------------------------------------------------

 
 
 

Am Staffs vs. pit bulls

Post by Susan Mudgett aka little gat » Fri, 12 Jul 1996 04:00:00


: >I find it hard to believe UKC is even recognizing them (such as the black

: >mouth CUR). I think it is mighty odd that so many of these breeds are not

: >from this country.  Their own country's registries won't recognize them  
: >but UKC will.
: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
:  
: Should anyone like to see a picture of a Yellow Black Mouthed Cur Dog, a
: native, American, purebred, working dog, go to the following url:
:  
: http://www.moonsgarden.com/~***cic/curdog.gif
:  
(snip)
:  
: Mind you, Old Yella was a Cur Dog. It's about time the UKC registered
: these.
: --
:  

I've checked the book, and Old Yeller does fit the description of the
Black Mouth in the Atlas of Dog Breeds. The author, Fred Gipson, also
said in the book that most of the dogs in central 1870s Texas, where
the story took place, were curs, and he says eleswhere that the book
was based on dog stories his grandparents who actually lived in 1870s
central Texas, told him.

There's a breed called Carolina Dog which is nicknamed Old Yeller
beacuse of their color, so sometimes people think Gipson's Yeller was
a Carolina Dog. He wasn't. Carolina dogs are lean leggy dogs with
slightly brushy coats and long natural tails, while Gipson's Yeller
was specified as a heavily built muscular dog with a slick coat and a
docked tail.

I have no idea why anyone would disapprove of UKC registering them,
unless it's someone so ignorant of the usage of the word "cur" that
they think curs are always useless mutts(which is the most common
modern usage of the word.) There are several purebred, though not well
known, cur breeds. The word "cur" once meant a specific type of dog
and not just an undesirable mix, as most people use the word now.