WreckitWhippet

You also need to consider how widespread and how strong the genes are in the breed. Given that dog fighting was outlawed in 1835 in England, the motivation to breed for fighting dogs has been reduced. Not gone, cause legislation didn't stop dog fighting entirely, and fighting remained legal much longer in some places outside England; but reduced. This leaves 170 years where fighting was not a primary focus. I'd say this is analogous to asking if the Olde English sheepdog was going to have herding instincts, despite being raised as a pet. Some of 'em will. Some of 'em won't. Some in-between, which will be influenced by training. With Labradors, we can make a retriever out of almost any pup, but with some of them you have to start early and work hard. For others it's natural. And you get some who won't look at a tennis ball, but given a bird, there's no stopping them. I don't think this applicable to the SBT, from my years of experience owning, exhibiting, breeding and being around others, I have come across very few who will not back down if another dog starts something. This is the reason why they require careful management when you have more than one of them. This is the reason why I suggest owners do not take them to dog parks". This is the reason why I have suggested in this thread that they are a breed to be wary of, especially in group situations. As Haredown has rightly pointed out, many are great at playing on their own terms, they are rough, play hard and fast and that's great while everyone playing the game is playing by their rules. It can turn from playing nicely to a fight in a nanosecond. I have seen less outright aggression and swinging off the end of the lead in the SBT over the years but I don't kid myself for one minutes that " some of them will" and "some of the won't" react with aggression when another dog has a go at them, or tells them off and the SBT takes exception to it. Having raised many and been vey careful over the years to "neutralise" my dogs when it comes to other dogs, I don't kid myself for a second that they won't finish what someone else starts and I find that to be the norm in the breed, there may be less of the outright "gameness" in the breed but they are still on the whole reactive. Obviously I wasn't around when dog fighting was considered an acceptable sport to measure the reactiveness of the breed, I'm going to assume that it has been watered down over the years but it's still there none the less and people need to be aware of this.

It's "American Staffordshire Terrier" the very least you can do when imparting your knowledge is to get the breed right.

If that doesn't make them prone to react with aggression, then I don't know what does. I don't doubt that there are some who breed for dog aggression, I doubt there is any self respecting ANKC breed enthusiast doing so. An SBT that didn't react to being set upon would indeed be a rare thing, there are some that are more tolerant than others. It's not a step in the direction f BSL to acknowledge where a breed has come from and the traits you need to be aware of if you plan on owning one. I can only see a more indepth knowledge and understanding of any breed as a good thing, perhaps if this were the case, we wouldn't see so many incidents and dog on dog aggression involving them.

ohhh my dear lord... So we say nothing at all. How about we accept that fact that owning a bull breed such as the SBT will require from the owner an acknowledgment of it's history and temperament traits and will need to be managed accordingly. The standard states that he is to be bold, fearless and totally reliable. He is also to be "a gentleman unless set upon" Let's get our heads our of our bums and look at what that really means. To put it bluntly, if someone starts it, or is perceived to have started something in the eyes of an SBT, you can bet he's going to finish it. This is not a slight on the breed but an acknowledgement of his past and many years of selective breeding.

I'd tell my vet to start treating him for meningitis

No it's not, whilst there is some variance within breeds when it comes to temperament, for the most part they come hard wired with breed traits and this includes a predisposition to aggression, prey drive, aloofness etc.

A dog getting rumbled is hardly and "attack", it doesn't excuse an owners lack of control but seriously people, so of the incidents that have happened in these "dog parks" are just that, minor incidents.

You might want to do some more reading on that one and what the hell is a "staffy type"

You miss the entire point of selective breeding. Its to ensure that some characteristics are more common in that breed than in the wider dog population. You judging all Bullbreeds by the behaviour of your dog is hardly a legitimate sample, especially when your dog is not of a breed or type bred for high levels of dog aggression. You also have a breed selectively bred for territorial aggression. Are you suggesting all Maremma tolerate strangers and dogs on their turf too? In my experience, most SBTs, Amstaffs etc are fine playing if its by their rules. They play hard and they like to be the big kid in the playground. They tend to be quite tolerant of smaller, submissive dogs. Challenge those rules and lots of things can happen. Owners who fail to acknowledge what any breed has been selected to be tend to be owners who can have rude surprises. I know cat safe sighthounds. I make no such assumption about all of them. Socialisation may modify breed characteristics to some degree but hardwiring can and does kick in. That sums it up quite nicely. They are more prone to dog aggression that other breeds. You can run a large pack of Beagles together, but you certainly would not be doing the same with 15 or so SBT's.

Go into Mullians Produce.

Whoa! That's really impressive! Overnight!!!!! Gee Whiz :laugh: It's a lovely place in summer, not too hot, not too cold just right :laugh:

Does he come from a fawn on black mating ?

I spent two years living in a tent, camping around Australia with my then boyf, sourcing our own food and water most nights. We fished with our limited resources and climbed coconut trees. We camped near water wherever possible (which also meant buffalo and crocs in the territory). I can start a fire without matches, lighter or flint. I know how to heat rocks to keep me warm and get water from a hole in the ground or leaves and cook on the most basic of structures. Survival and safety is your top priority. To me he was unprepared for an emergency or a disaster if all it took was one lousy bear to put him at that kind of risk. How did every knife, gun, bow, arrow, fish hook, rope, etc get damaged beyond use? You can do an awful lot with just one knife. You never keep all your valuables together for a start and you always have a mini emergency kit on your own body at all times. As for keeping his food safe and out of bear grasp, that's a whole other issue. I don't care if he ate the last platypus on earth - in my eyes he wasn't prepared and his dog paid the price for that very early on in his trip and he seems like the kind of tool who will do something similar again. The world needs adventurers, but not idiots. :clap: good for you.

No it's not ok but this appears to be the method by which they gain "evidence" or doctor that "evidence" as was the case with the Collie Rough's. The RSPCA and Councils can walk through any establishment any time they like, so why do we need vigilante's breaking into people's property in the name of "animal rights". Debra Tranters "poster child" was himself stolen. AA and OL think they can do anything they please and obviously they can as no one is prepared to stop them. It's about time some of them were shot.

I'd be more worried about those on DOL who think it's OK to steal an animal that belongs to another because they judge the animal to be unwanted and neglected, than getting one of mine back from the pound or RSPCA should it escape my yard. If a dog is chipped than you've got 14 days for find it, if some do-gooder takes it off the street, your chances of finding it in their back yard are limited, especially if you have already been judged by the DOL jury as a bad owner.

Pretty big call to say he was unprepared. If he'd been on horseback or camel and run into trouble, would people still be so up in arms if he decided to eat one of those ? The only reason some are upset is because he's eaten a dog.

never and if they do then shut the toilet door, it's that simple

If you are worried about spey incontinence , then the best thing that can be done is to avoid desexing at such an early age.

follow the trail of destruction from Jim's to AA to DW, it's been 15 years of no care and no responsibility.

The facts are, the dog ended up at the RSPCA, was unable to be identified due to a lack of a microchip , served it's time and was rehomed. The dog was an unidentifiable stray and was rehomed accordingly. At the time of being rehomed, the dog did not have an owner. I agree with those who say it's not right to keep another person's dog, you can't simply pull one off the street and keep it because you thinks it's unwanted or neglected but this dog was rehomed legally, after being held for the required amount of time.

What's the big deal, he ate his dog ? Just because as a dog owner you can't imagine doing it, doesn't mean you wouldn't either.

Ohhh the irony of DOL. It's ok for people to find a dog or steal one that they think is neglected, unwanted, unloved and keep it. Yet DOL is prepared to condemn a family that has legally adopted a dog and did not want to return the dog to it's original owner.

No I would not. The new owners have legally adopted the dog, the RSCPA legally put the dog up for adoption. The only person who did the wrong thing here was the previous owner and I don't feel sorry for her. The mere fact that she couldn't be arsed to chip the dog, says it all for me. ETA: Given the RSPCA track record it was lucky to have made it out of there alive.

Doesn't surprise me at all, I wouldn't let that man anywhere near an animal of mine

..and I think help will be valuable in learning more about the whys/wherefores & the best way to mange the individuals .... :) The best way to manage the two is to keep them separate. Build separate runs and don't let them together.