What Constitutes A "pit Bull Terrier"

[Wobbly]

Yeah you're right, there really was no control in the beginning, it was just the dogs that wouldn't back down. Hugely diverse. I think it was the same for many breeds back then, they were mostly types, breed is a rather modern concept. And yes, the ridiculous Gottis being ADBA registered really does devalue the papers.

Agree, it's the dogs behind them that matter. The legacy of those dogs who are the base of the breed.

I think on some of these things we should agree to disagree amicably, because these are issues with no clear answers, we have differing opinions, but that's good, it means our ideas are all from differing perspectives, which is educational for us all. Ultimately, we all share the same passion, the APBT, and we're under heavy fire right now, sticking together is important, united we stand. Please accept my apolgies if I come off as arrogant, or pigheaded, text only communication can often make things sound harsher than they were meant to sound. We do need to stick together.

[Tempus Fugit]

What do you experts think about the accuracy of the information on this web page: Happy Pit Bull ?

[mita]

Where can I find this information for qld please? Daughter has a Dane x and council visited her to tell her they are investigating her pitbull wandering the street attacking people.....no prizes that the neighbor complained as she has done for the previous 3 tenants dogs. Mind oh she has 3 dogs herself that how the,selves at the fence when my grandies are outside playing but that's a whole other story

PM, I was wondering how the situation was going, re your daughter's dog & the Council's visit. I don't know about the various Councils in Qld, but the RSPCA here comes out strongly & publicly, now, saying the approach should be 'deed not breed'.

I've certainly noticed among the many lovely, good-natured dogs for adoption from AWl Qld, quite a few are distinctly bully types. Few years back, when the hysteria & witch-hunting were at its worst in Qld, dogs like that would've been condemned on sight.

[Dame Aussie]

What do you experts think about the accuracy of the information on this web page: Happy Pit Bull ?

I think that's quite a good explanation of how the breed/type developed and the other breeds that are messed up in all the BSL business.

Not that I'd call myself an expert! :laugh:

[blakkjackal]

What do you experts think about the accuracy of the information on this web page: Happy Pit Bull ?

No. No no no no no.

This is the exact reason BSL has such an impact on "pit bulls" -- because everything remotely looking like one is one.

Pit bull is short for American Pit Bull Terrier. Nothing else.

[melzawelza]

What do you experts think about the accuracy of the information on this web page: Happy Pit Bull ?

No. No no no no no.

This is the exact reason BSL has such an impact on "pit bulls" -- because everything remotely looking like one is one.

Pit bull is short for American Pit Bull Terrier. Nothing else.

It might have been once but the term has evolved and now means exactly what is described at the link (love that page).

Animal farm foundation have some good info on the way this term has changed and evolved to now essentially mean any mixed breed dog that lacks any characteristics of NOT being a 'pit bull'.

[Rocketeer]

What do you experts think about the accuracy of the information on this web page: Happy Pit Bull ?

I the wide range of breeds mentioned in the bracket, may seem like an exaggeration for Australia. But realistic for the USA.

As for the rest of the blog. Seems like he has a good understanding of the development of the breed and the current situation of the breed in the USA. He discusses the various definitions of the 'Pit Bull" term, the "Fad" American Bullys, and other relevant/popular discussions.

[Runamuk_AST]

A Pit Bull as i understand it,

...is simply a "Bulldog" that's used in the fighting Pit. Keeping in mind that a "Bulldog" in the USA in NOT necessarily a "Brachycephalic" type of dog that most people from other countries would visulise it to be. A "Bulldog" can be of any mix or any pure breed and is described as a hard, tenasious, fearless no messing type of dog.

"Pit", in the word "Pit Bull" discribes the "FUNCTION" that that dog performes, the same as the function of a Sheppard was to Sheppard and the function of a Pointer was the Point etc etc.

Unfortunately i didnt book mark this reference but i have read that the dogman of old would only call a dog a Pit Bull "AFTER" it had won 3 fight's, it was a kind of title that was put on a dog, unlike the "Ch" title put on the Pit dogs of today when it has won 3. I recon if this is true the dogman of old would be rolling in their grave with all these dogs being called Pit Bulls whitout even putting so much as a Paw in the Pit!!??

Dogs back in the early day's would be roaming the streets everywhere, if you saw a good prospect having a Scrap with another dog then it would be trained for the Pit, if it was any good it would then be used in their breeding program. It didnt matter what the dog "was" or looked like, it was all about performance!.... infact many dogs used where just Mangy bred street dogs, not dogs of a "pure breed"!

[pepe001]

I bet if you did a survey of the public then most would agree with the sites definition. The only ones who consider a pitbull to be an APBT are dog fanciers who know what the breed standard is. I even met a girl a few months ago who said she had lost her pitty. I asked what colour so I could keep an eye out. She said óh she is coloured like a blue heeler'. I questioned this and she actually had a blue*rotti but apparently that also constitutes a pitty???? I never saw the dog but she said so many people said it was a pitbull then it must have been.

[Runamuk_AST]

I bet if you did a survey of the public then most would agree with the sites definition. The only ones who consider a pitbull to be an APBT are dog fanciers who know what the breed standard is. I even met a girl a few months ago who said she had lost her pitty. I asked what colour so I could keep an eye out. She said óh she is coloured like a blue heeler'. I questioned this and she actually had a blue*rotti but apparently that also constitutes a pitty???? I never saw the dog but she said so many people said it was a pitbull then it must have been.

The only ones who consider a pitbull to be an APBT are dog fanciers who know what the breed standard is.

I think there are 2 different breed standards for the "Pit Bull".

The first one is the Standard that the Pit Dogman use, and that would be the Results of the match, a "performance" based standard (ADBA Reg)

...and then you have the "written" standard that the "Conformation" Pit Breeders are using, which i think is probably more U.K.C Reg Pit's these day.

[blakkjackal]

A Pit Bull as i understand it,

...is simply a "Bulldog" that's used in the fighting Pit. Keeping in mind that a "Bulldog" in the USA in NOT necessarily a "Brachycephalic" type of dog that most people from other countries would visulise it to be. A "Bulldog" can be of any mix or any pure breed and is described as a hard, tenasious, fearless no messing type of dog.

"Pit", in the word "Pit Bull" discribes the "FUNCTION" that that dog performes, the same as the function of a Sheppard was to Sheppard and the function of a Pointer was the Point etc etc.

Unfortunately i didnt book mark this reference but i have read that the dogman of old would only call a dog a Pit Bull "AFTER" it had won 3 fight's, it was a kind of title that was put on a dog, unlike the "Ch" title put on the Pit dogs of today when it has won 3. I recon if this is true the dogman of old would be rolling in their grave with all these dogs being called Pit Bulls whitout even putting so much as a Paw in the Pit!!??

Dogs back in the early day's would be roaming the streets everywhere, if you saw a good prospect having a Scrap with another dog then it would be trained for the Pit, if it was any good it would then be used in their breeding program. It didnt matter what the dog "was" or looked like, it was all about performance!.... infact many dogs used where just Mangy bred street dogs, not dogs of a "pure breed"!

You happen to remember the name of that dogman? Interesting, as even Mr Colby bred several champions/grand champions and they are considered one of the first "modern", more or less pure bred pit dogs. Unless that is what you mean by today's dogs?

I agree with the rest too but nevertheless the breeding program was closely monitored and while they didn't necessarily breed for a certain type or for the sake of keeping the breed "pure" they went for the one distinguishing feature of the APBT, gameness. Pedigrees were also recorded pretty much from the start.

Has anyone heard of the Irish Ch Stormer? He was a battle cross, staff x bull terrier and proved himself both in the pit and as a producer. He was used over Irish SBTs and every dog with him in their ped isn't considered any less pure bred than the one without. Function before form.

E: I wouldn't put too much emphasis on the different registries, ADBA isn't quite what it used to be and we can't forget that the first reg. matching APBTs were indeed UKC-registered. There's still; "old time" registries around though, that actually care about the pedigrees of the dogs and won't register just about everything (do I need to say... Whopper?) unlike the major organisations.

Edited August 1, 2013 by Hockz

[blakkjackal]

Alrighty here's a link I think might be useful to some people. What is a "pit bull".

[Rocketeer]

A Pit Bull as i understand it,

...is simply a "Bulldog" that's used in the fighting Pit. Keeping in mind that a "Bulldog" in the USA in NOT necessarily a "Brachycephalic" type of dog that most people from other countries would visulise it to be. A "Bulldog" can be of any mix or any pure breed and is described as a hard, tenasious, fearless no messing type of dog.

"Pit", in the word "Pit Bull" discribes the "FUNCTION" that that dog performes, the same as the function of a Sheppard was to Sheppard and the function of a Pointer was the Point etc etc.

Unfortunately i didnt book mark this reference but i have read that the dogman of old would only call a dog a Pit Bull "AFTER" it had won 3 fight's, it was a kind of title that was put on a dog, unlike the "Ch" title put on the Pit dogs of today when it has won 3. I recon if this is true the dogman of old would be rolling in their grave with all these dogs being called Pit Bulls whitout even putting so much as a Paw in the Pit!!??

Dogs back in the early day's would be roaming the streets everywhere, if you saw a good prospect having a Scrap with another dog then it would be trained for the Pit, if it was any good it would then be used in their breeding program. It didnt matter what the dog "was" or looked like, it was all about performance!.... infact many dogs used where just Mangy bred street dogs, not dogs of a "pure breed"!

I agree in the beginning the pit bull was simply a "pit-bull- terrier". Any fighting dog of bulldog and terrier blood. Back in the day the breed was basically "using whatever works". No one really cared about keeping a close eye on pedigrees as long as the dogs performed. The reputation of the Breeder, the Kennel and the Dogs were worth more than the pedigrees. If you had winning dogs, that's all that mattered.

The Dogmen never really cared about pedigree papers. Why would they bother? They know where to get the best blood. It was all about reputation. If you have a good "game" bloodline people will know you (and your dogs) and people will seek to breed or buy from you. So why would they need Pedigree Papers when the dogs speak for themselves. It's pretty simple.

Now I think this is where the confusion comes from. The fact that the 'Books' were never really closed for the Breed( because there was really no "Book" in the first place) has caused a whole lot of breed mis-identification. The breed was never well defined, which lead to the "pit bull" term being used very loosely worldwide. The range of breeds, colours, sizes, temperaments, types, associated with the Term "Pitbull" therefore doesn't come as a surprise.

[blakkjackal]

A Pit Bull as i understand it,

...is simply a "Bulldog" that's used in the fighting Pit. Keeping in mind that a "Bulldog" in the USA in NOT necessarily a "Brachycephalic" type of dog that most people from other countries would visulise it to be. A "Bulldog" can be of any mix or any pure breed and is described as a hard, tenasious, fearless no messing type of dog.

"Pit", in the word "Pit Bull" discribes the "FUNCTION" that that dog performes, the same as the function of a Sheppard was to Sheppard and the function of a Pointer was the Point etc etc.

Unfortunately i didnt book mark this reference but i have read that the dogman of old would only call a dog a Pit Bull "AFTER" it had won 3 fight's, it was a kind of title that was put on a dog, unlike the "Ch" title put on the Pit dogs of today when it has won 3. I recon if this is true the dogman of old would be rolling in their grave with all these dogs being called Pit Bulls whitout even putting so much as a Paw in the Pit!!??

Dogs back in the early day's would be roaming the streets everywhere, if you saw a good prospect having a Scrap with another dog then it would be trained for the Pit, if it was any good it would then be used in their breeding program. It didnt matter what the dog "was" or looked like, it was all about performance!.... infact many dogs used where just Mangy bred street dogs, not dogs of a "pure breed"!

I agree in the beginning the pit bull was simply a "pit-bull- terrier". Any fighting dog of bulldog and terrier blood. Back in the day the breed was basically "using whatever works". No one really cared about keeping a close eye on pedigrees as long as the dogs performed. The reputation of the Breeder, the Kennel and the Dogs were worth more than the pedigrees. If you had winning dogs, that's all that mattered.

The Dogmen never really cared about pedigree papers. Why would they bother? They know where to get the best blood. It was all about reputation. If you have a good "game" bloodline people will know you (and your dogs) and people will seek to breed or buy from you. So why would they need Pedigree Papers when the dogs speak for themselves. It's pretty simple.

Now I think this is where the confusion comes from. The fact that the 'Books' were never really closed for the Breed( because there was really no "Book" in the first place) has caused a whole lot of breed mis-identification. The breed was never well defined, which lead to the "pit bull" term being used very loosely worldwide. The range of breeds, colours, sizes, temperaments, types, associated with the Term "Pitbull" therefore doesn't come as a surprise.

Yet the APBT as a breed probably has one of the worlds most documented histories when it comes to pedigrees. If you have a pedigree you can pretty much trace it back all the way to the earliest ancestors (that were kept track of, that is -- most producers would fall under that category though).

[Rocketeer]

Yes there are many stories regarding the breed, stories that can go back to the Middle Ages. But at what point did this “Breed” become a “Breed”?

Who’s to say what is and what isn’t a pit bull. Is the term exclusive to a hand full of foundation bloodlines? What are the official foundation bloodlines? What bloodlines are the ones that are exclusively in? Whoever said “your in and your not”?

So bloodlines that formed after these foundation bloodlines, consisting of different genetics. Are they still Apbts? Or is it only dogs that can be traced back to a handful of “foundation bloodlines”?

My point being- Who’s been keeping track of all the bloodlines all these years? And who’s to say bloodline is an APBT bloodline and which isn’t?

[melzawelza]

Yes there are many stories regarding the breed, stories that can go back to the Middle Ages. But at what point did this “Breed” become a “Breed”?

Who’s to say what is and what isn’t a pit bull. Is the term exclusive to a hand full of foundation bloodlines? What are the official foundation bloodlines? What bloodlines are the ones that are exclusively in? Whoever said “your in and your not”?

So bloodlines that formed after these foundation bloodlines, consisting of different genetics. Are they still Apbts? Or is it only dogs that can be traced back to a handful of “foundation bloodlines”?

My point being- Who’s been keeping track of all the bloodlines all these years? And who’s to say bloodline is an APBT bloodline and which isn’t?

The ADBA and the UKC have kept pedigrees for the APBT since the late 1800s.

[Rocketeer]

Yes there are many stories regarding the breed, stories that can go back to the Middle Ages. But at what point did this “Breed” become a “Breed”?

Who’s to say what is and what isn’t a pit bull. Is the term exclusive to a hand full of foundation bloodlines? What are the official foundation bloodlines? What bloodlines are the ones that are exclusively in? Whoever said “your in and your not”?

So bloodlines that formed after these foundation bloodlines, consisting of different genetics. Are they still Apbts? Or is it only dogs that can be traced back to a handful of “foundation bloodlines”?

My point being- Who’s been keeping track of all the bloodlines all these years? And who’s to say bloodline is an APBT bloodline and which isn’t?

The ADBA and the UKC have kept pedigrees for the APBT since the late 1800s.

The ADBA and UKC have registered many dogs since the 1800s. Many dogs have been given pedigrees, not to mention American Bullys being registered as APBTs. One of the founding American Bully breeders clearly states that the American Bully is a mixture of APBT, AST and various other Bulldogs. Yet they are still registered as pedigree APBTs.

This is part of the confusion. Where do you draw the line on what IS an APBT and what ISN'T? In the beginning they were just various Bull-Terrier fighting dogs know by a myriad of terms like; bulldogs, game dogs, pit dogs, pit bulldogs, staffordshires, yankee terriers etc. So when did the term "American Pit Bull Terrier" become officially exclusive to certain bloodlines? When did the 'books' ever close on the breed?

[sandgrubber]

Try googling 'pedigree pit bull' and look at the pictures. They're all over the place.

[ricey]

I look at it this way - you have the pure breds, dogs of known pedigree - the Amstaff and the APBT.

Then you have all the BYBs, no pedigree records, you can't possibly know what they are for sure - Pit Bull type, or Pit Bull is a generic description for these dogs of unknown provenance.

The gamebred pitbull is the original type of Apbt. In saying that the breed was never well defined from the beginning. The were many different variations, bloodlines, mixes and yes names for the dog. To me it's seems the dog was more of a concept than a breed. It's only when some of the dogmen tried to begin to regulate the breed that the Apbt name was more tied to standard. How legitimate you think these Apbt registries(and their pedigrees) are, is up to you. I personally won't pay for their papers.

Are you seriously saying if you were offered a dog from say Tatonka's next breeding (Sorrell dogs), and you knew the ped was genuine you wouldn't take it in a heart beat? I bet Ricey would jump on it no hesitation!

Dogs like Chinaman, Honeybunch, Jeep, Eli, Spook, Butcher Boy, Buck, Eli, Red Boy etc... etc... I am sure you know all the more famous sires and dams as well I do, we do tend to be obsessive about our breed history we APBT fans, no need for a list. They were extensively line bred on the proviso gameness tends to be hereditary, so a distinct breed was created from these dogs, to capture that trait and propagate it. These old dogs, with that trait of gameness are the basis for the APBT breed, and it is most certainly a breed. The lines that were based on the old dogs - Garner's dogs, Boudreaux's dogs, the Red Hemphill dogs, Colby dogs, Reid dogs, pick your favourite lines... the list goes on, all those men that linebred their best - they created a breed based upon those dogs. There are differences between these lines, both physically and temperamentally, the red dogs are bigger, the Colby dogs are calmer, the Sorrell dogs are all action... Different lines, differences in temperament and structure (the same can be said of GSDs, Kelpies, lots of breeds), but still one breed - the one breed that emphasised gameness as it's primary trait.

Sure there are hung papers, but there's a lot of genuine papers too (very, very few in this country though I think....). The APBTs of modern times, a breed descended from the greats, carrying the genetics for gameness, are incredibly valuable. Gameness is a maladaptive trait, a dog too willing to die does not have the opportunity to pass on his genes, even within APBTs it doesn't crop up with any reliability, since it's fundamentally contrary to the survival of an individual. It's a genetic trait that hasn't been selected for as comprehensively in any other breed that I am aware of, some other terriers perhaps, but those were also selected for breeding for other reasons as well, gameness wasn't the sole determiner for the other terriers. An APBT of genuine good pedigree is about as valuable as it's possible for a dog to be in my eyes, animals carrying this genetic trait of gameness (whether it's expressed or not) there is nothing else like them.

Problem in Australia is we don't know what we have, just a bunch of Pit Bull type mutts, no known pedigree, it's anybody's guess whats in these dogs. The BYBs pumping them out don't even know what an APBT is, they think their poorly formed dogs of incorrect temperament and structure are APBTs, because they have a red nose or a big head or whatever. Bet there's lots of Visla in a lot of the red noses hereabouts, it's weird to me how the red dogs are so popular in Australia, what is with that? Stratton thought they were too big, well they're even bigger here now the idiot BYBs have mixed Viszla and even Dogue De Bordeaux in to get that all important money spinning red nose.

If there is no pedigree they aren't APBTs, they aren't American Staffordshires, they're Pit Bulls, the catch all term for generic Bull breeds of no known ancestry.

Just IMO, feel free to differ. I think there are really no absolutes here - it's like the question of whether an AmStaff is an APBT or not, opinions vary, it's hard to say who's correct on points with no absolutes.

Yes, if any of you could point me to a reputable pit bull breeder in Australia that could provide me with a well bred APBT pup I'd jump on that! I don't want an AmStaff, I want an American Pit Bull Terrier, the real deal. AmStaffs are good dogs, but their breeding has diverged from APBTs for too long, for nearly 80 years now, and they have strayed too far. Some (but not all) AmStaffs have become overly blocky dogs that would be better used as concrete building blocks.

My dog Hobbes is 13 years old now; many of the WA DOLers know Hobbes and he is a lovely dog. But he is 13 going on 14 and he is getting a tad old. Really, the bridge is calling him. I'd like another APBT when Hobbes goes; no dog could replace him but another APBT might come close.

These dogs, these APBTs are really the best ever of the many dog breeds. Anything else is lesser, and is really just another dog.

Perhaps I state my case too strongly and perhaps I get in your face but the APBT is the best of dogs and they have been bred for hundreds of years to be the best of dogs. Some say that the APBT has been bred for thousands of years, from the Roman days. No other dog breed can have that said about them. Most of today's common dog breeds are lucky to have been around for more than 80 years. The APBT's blood line goes back a long way, more than 200 years at least and a long way further than most breeds. Your Labradoodle or Shih Tsu/Maltese Terror is an anomaly developed in the last 15 years at best.

Cheers,

ricey

(ducks for cover, and waits for the shit to hit the fan)

Edited September 11, 2013 by ricey

[Rocketeer]

Try googling 'pedigree pit bull' and look at the pictures. They're all over the place.

So I google 'pedigree pit bull' and these are some of the pictures I got. That is- a range of different shapes, sizes, types, looks. Which highlights my point.

Everyone is great at stating what isn't a 'real' pit bull. Yet no-one has given a concrete definition of what is a pit bull.