|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Oct 17, 2011 14:18:39 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by emilys on Oct 17, 2011 19:15:01 GMT -5
1) it is historically wrong to talk about the APBT before the mid 19th century. Many types of dogs were fought before then (as now); some of which were precursors to our dog of today. But they weren't APBTs. If you don't understand that, then really, STFU. If you want to talk about all the fighting breed/types of the world, go knock yourself out, but don't claim to be about the APBT which DID NOT EXIST until the mid 19th century. 2) we can infer only a little from pre-photographic images of dogs (and other animals for that matter) so it's also wrong to make too firm conclusions about what any dog breed/type looked like. 3) glorification of gamedogs and especially gamedog breeders is one of the worst aspects of the post AWA (1976) era. There are people who refused to give up dogfighting, or defending dogfighting, even after it became widely illegal in the USA. Dogmen were not and are not gods who adored their dogs as we understand (our pet pit bulls surely derive from their castoffs). In the early days, some were members of "society" and some, like Mr Colby, were evidently gentleman.. who in the end wanted nothing more than for society, as represented by the AKC, to accept their dogs. But at least in the last 100 years, it's been largely a lowclass underground activity. And the boys who worship dogmen, wrote all the books and ran all the internet discussions about pit bulls until about 5-10 years ago, are no better. They prevented a clear understanding of the breed, and it's in part because of them and the image they perpetuated that fight bust dogs were always killed. The pre-pinker "pit bulls are dogs like any others" who fought with the gamedog cultists are the ones who have rehabilitated and normalized the APBT (for better AND for worse) 4). If anything is worse than the glorification of dogmen, it's the glorification of the notion that fighting dogs don't feel pain (and making the completely inappropriate analogy to human fighters ... I've never yet heard of any notion of "dead game" (as in "the only dead game dog is a dead dog) applied to humans 5) If you're not disgusted and appalled at the match reports that approvingly describe 2 dogs ripping each other to shreds, even to the point of death, then there is something lacking in your humanity. 6) dogfighting is PAST PAST PAST. What we know now about many game dogs (the ones that noble rescuers save from the scum who own them) is that they are extremely happy NOT to be placed in a position of having to fight another dog. 7) stupid macho posturing by dogs (or humans) is almost always an expression of fear/insecurity rather than courage. The ADBA does our breed NO FAVOR by encouraging this stupid behavior 8) STFU about the notion that our dogs "love to fight". Select for heightened prey drive towards other dogs, condition them that other dogs are enemies, restrict their socialization, train them that you want them to fight, place them in a confined area with a similar dog, and you've created inevitable conditions where dogs WILL fight. 9) There have always been different body styles in the APBT (as in other breeds). The ADBA is ONE type. It is NOT the only authentic type. And you simply cannot find any photographs of fighting dogs from the turn of the century that look like the typical ripped ADBA dogs. As you can't find photographs of many HUMAN fighters before 1970 who are very ripped (look at photos of Joe Louis, for example). Even aside from the steroid issue, people had different ideas about what physical fitness was, and different understanding of how to achieve it. 10) can we please put dogfighting in the "dustbin of history" where it belongs? Yeah, the APBT was forged in large part from dogfighting. So what? We wouldn't have rock n roll without the slavery that brought Africans and their music to the US. Only racists make excuses for slavery, and only cretins make excuses for dogfighting. 11) at this point I have no idea what a "game dog" is. Technically, they are dogs proven in the pit, and that's illegal. A "gamebred" dog is one descended immediately from "game" dogs, so those would be illegal too. We have "dogs descended from gamedog lines".... so what? To call a typical ADBA dog a "game dog" is ahistorical, meaningless and perpetuates antediluvian notions about our dogs 12) IMO, the only real tests of "gameness" in a dog that are legal and socially acceptable would be things that truly exploit our breed's native courage and determination. That is NOT agility, obedience, flyball, mondio/shutzhund or any other sport. It has to involve extreme physical stress and the possibility of injury. The closest thing I can come up with is SAR and its related (cadaver, drug detection) activities |
|
|
|
Post by suziriot on Oct 17, 2011 19:19:20 GMT -5
Excellent summary, Em. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Post by catstina on Oct 17, 2011 19:41:56 GMT -5
Very well put, Emily.
|
|
|
|
Post by loverocksalot on Oct 18, 2011 7:21:36 GMT -5
Where the heck is that history thread that became an awesome discussion. I tried to post it on the blue thread since I thought that the history thread should be re opened. Im still looking for it but I really should be doing other things right now. LOL Found it this was one of them the other was I think the thread on Stubby which may have started the history learn it thread. therealpitbull.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=pitbull101&action=display&thread=6839 |
|
|
|
Post by legacy23 on Oct 18, 2011 8:28:22 GMT -5
That really was a great summary and you hit the nail on the head. I have a question though, I was watching a tv show once and it was about the over-population of wild hogs in the south. (Yeah I know I watch some crazy things sometimes. Discovery Channel, FTW!) People down there were allowed to hunt the wild hogs in an attempt to keep the population in check. (which isn't helping too much) The hunters worked as a team with their dogs, the dogs they chose were by and large Pit Bulls. The dogs would catch the hogs and attempt to hold them down long enough for the hunters to get there and kill it. Now I have no problem with legal hunting, and the hunters chose Pit Bulls for the breed traits. I honestly feel like that type of work is one of the best ways to show off why our dogs are gladiators. They had to go up against these hogs which outweighed them at least 6 to 1 and the hogs have excellent ways of defending themselves. This is a legal, and in my mind humane way to show off our dogs capabilities. Has anyone seen the show I'm referring to and what do you think about it as a good way to show off the breeds traits?
|
|
mhaze
I Love RPBF!
Posts: 455
|
Post by mhaze on Oct 18, 2011 8:36:40 GMT -5
Excellent points, Emily. I really appreciate your depth of knowledge on the subject. Definitely agree on all points, especially the point that gameness is a term that doesn't exist outside illegal activity. Obviously there are so many qualities to admire in the Pit Bull. It is sad that there's a group that clearly seems to admire a trait that was only proven by despicable cruelty, and has no place in modern society.
|
|
|
|
Post by legacy23 on Oct 18, 2011 8:42:44 GMT -5
I've found some videos from the show dsc.discovery.com/videos/hogs-gone-wild-dog-vs-hog/Pit Bulls aren't the only type of dog the hunters use but they are the ones responsible for holding the hog down until the hunters get there. P.S. Maybe it's just me but the video with the dog chasing the hog from the the dogs pov is amazing. |
|
mhaze
I Love RPBF!
Posts: 455
|
Post by mhaze on Oct 18, 2011 8:54:41 GMT -5
I've found some videos from the show dsc.discovery.com/videos/hogs-gone-wild-dog-vs-hog/Pit Bulls aren't the only type of dog the hunters use but they are the ones responsible for holding the hog down until the hunters get there. P.S. Maybe it's just me but the video with the dog chasing the hog from the the dogs pov is amazing. Not only are they not the only type, but they are a slim minority among hog dogs. I am not a fan of hunting hogs with dogs, but I do know that Pit Bulls are not the dog of choice as catch dogs for a variety of reasons. Can they do it? Sure, but they're not the norm among catch dogs IMHO. Either way, I think the 'sport' is inhumane by any definition. |
|
|
|
Post by legacy23 on Oct 18, 2011 8:59:35 GMT -5
I'm glad I can have you weigh in on it because you seem to know more about it than I do. From what I've saw you're right Pit Bulls are the minority when it comes to hunting the hogs but I've only saw them used as catch dogs and no other breed for that purpose.
I hope you don't mind me picking your brain a little but what other breeds are better suited for being a catch dog? What are some of the reasons Pit Bulls are not the ideal choice? And why do you feel the "sport" is inhumane?
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Oct 18, 2011 9:48:32 GMT -5
Hog hunting is way cruel. There are some pretty gnarly vids out there showing hogs being attacked/held by the dogs, the hunters manhandling them, and you really can't help but feel sorry for the hogs. Also sport hog catching is worse, IMO, because it's a no-win for the hog trapped in a pen.
I looked into it a while back because a lot of Pit Bull people are interested in it, but a lot of hog dogs are American Bulldogs, bulldogs of other sorts, curs, or Pit Bull mixes. Also they use bay dogs to find the hogs and alert, then the catch dogs come in.
Bayed Solid is the primary magazine of the sport, I think their website is baydog.com.
And my usual disclaimer: I do not like hunting, BUT I think hunting that offers as quick and painless a death as possible for the animal, being hunted in its own environment, when done as a means to obtain food, is WAY more ethical than buying store-bought meat.
|
|
mhaze
I Love RPBF!
Posts: 455
|
Post by mhaze on Oct 18, 2011 9:49:58 GMT -5
I'm glad I can have you weigh in on it because you seem to know more about it than I do. From what I've saw you're right Pit Bulls are the minority when it comes to hunting the hogs but I've only saw them used as catch dogs and no other breed for that purpose. I hope you don't mind me picking your brain a little but what other breeds are better suited for being a catch dog? What are some of the reasons Pit Bulls are not the ideal choice? And why do you feel the "sport" is inhumane? I'll oblige you briefly, as this is already going off topic. I have seen it first hand in South Florida when I was very young, and know some people who still do it. There are Black Mouth curs, Catahoulas, American Bulldogs to name a few. In Australia, Dogos seem to be the choice breed - but I don't really know that first hand. As we all know, Pit Bulls can be DA, something not ideal in a situation where dogs work closely together. I've read peoples accounts that they tend to fight the pig rather than hold it, etc. I am by no means an expert, but that's what I know. I'm not going to argue about how humane it is. It seems obvious to me. That's my opinion based on first hand knowledge, and it's not going to change. I grew up in a hunting family. I'm not anti hunting, but it's not for me. If you want to know more on the subject, Google is your friend. I hope that helps. Getting back to topic: Hog hunting has nothing to do with gameness by definition. Even most of the game dog people would agree with that. To me, that term doesn't evolve to mean something new. |
|
mhaze
I Love RPBF!
Posts: 455
|
Post by mhaze on Oct 18, 2011 9:52:02 GMT -5
And my usual disclaimer: I do not like hunting, BUT I think hunting that offers as quick and painless a death as possible for the animal, being hunted in its own environment, when done as a means to obtain food, is WAY more ethical than buying store-bought meat. I can't argue with that. Hunting hogs with dogs is far from quick and painless for either party. |
|
|
|
Post by catstina on Oct 18, 2011 9:53:03 GMT -5
And my usual disclaimer: I do not like hunting, BUT I think hunting that offers as quick and painless a death as possible for the animal, being hunted in its own environment, when done as a means to obtain food, is WAY more ethical than buying store-bought meat. I agree to a certain extent. I think that most hunters try to do it quickly and as painlessly as possible. BUT I think that hog hunting is not done in this way. They put the animals through so much before they end their lives. It is most definitely an inhumane act. |
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Oct 18, 2011 9:58:35 GMT -5
And my usual disclaimer: I do not like hunting, BUT I think hunting that offers as quick and painless a death as possible for the animal, being hunted in its own environment, when done as a means to obtain food, is WAY more ethical than buying store-bought meat. I can't argue with that. Hunting hogs with dogs is far from quick and painless for either party. Right, it's extremely traumatic and painful for the hog. Also, I really don't think it is a way to test gameness in Pit Bulls. It's essentially baiting. This is a grab and hold thing. Matching dogs with equal attributes who will each fight back on a fairly level playing field is a lot different, IMO. This is why even though very similar and even though Pit Bulls are close relatives of the original bulldog, they aren't the same thing. There is a separation between true baiting dogs (the bulldogs) and the Pit Bull, which is a dog bred to fight other dogs NOT just grab/hold/hang on. |
|
|
|
Post by emilys on Oct 18, 2011 10:03:03 GMT -5
And my usual disclaimer: I do not like hunting, BUT I think hunting that offers as quick and painless a death as possible for the animal, being hunted in its own environment, when done as a means to obtain food, is WAY more ethical than buying store-bought meat. I can't argue with that. Hunting hogs with dogs is far from quick and painless for either party. Ethical hunting for meat is very acceptable to me (and unless you're a vegetarian, you can't have any consistent moral objections... people who kill their own food surely are the most honest meateaters). I'm not a fan of killing other animals just for "sport" or for trophies.. or disgustingly around here, for "target practice". I agree with others about discomfort/disapproval about hoghunting. It's really just a wild form of bullbaiting if you think about it. And yes, very dangerous/cruel to both dog and hog. I'm not a fan of using dogs in any hunting (except retrieving). I understand why the pit bull hoghunters want to call it a test of "gameness" because it does engage the dog's courage/determination and there is the threat of injury. |
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Oct 18, 2011 10:13:56 GMT -5
12) IMO, the only real tests of "gameness" in a dog that are legal and socially acceptable would be things that truly exploit our breed's native courage and determination. That is NOT agility, obedience, flyball, mondio/shutzhund or any other sport. It has to involve extreme physical stress and the possibility of injury. The closest thing I can come up with is SAR and its related (cadaver, drug detection) activities I don't believe there is any legal, humane activity that can test for gameness as it applies to the APBT. My suggestion for breeders is to select for temperament traits that match the true Pit Bull as close as possible (mushy/soft with people, not shy/fearful, drivey, don't select against dog-aggression per se, but rule out for breeding candidates those dogs that are overly aggressive and cannot learn to chill out/be in the presence of other dogs), participate in sporting activities that test the dog's physical capabilties and drive (weight pull, agility, SAR, etc) and then health test. Great post, btw. I don't think I can argue with anything you said ;D |
|
|
|
Post by legacy23 on Oct 18, 2011 11:44:32 GMT -5
I see where everyone is coming from on this and thanks for not chewing my head off.
mhaze: Thanks for answering my questions and I agree continuing to talk about hog hunting will take this thread off topic. I see why you say Pit Bulls wouldn't be the ideal catch dog and I understand why you feel that it is inhumane.
Mary: Thanks for chiming in also.
Emilys: "I understand why the pit bull hoghunters want to call it a test of "gameness" because it does engage the dog's courage/determination and there is the threat of injury." That's essentially what I meant.
I would like to continue a discussion on this but not here because I don't want to clutter this thread with nonsense.
One thing I would like to say though is the way I see it, in nature dogs are predators and animals like hogs are prey. If humans weren't here dogs would naturally hunt prey animals, they would kill them and eat them. Would the animal suffer? Most likely, but that is nature in my eyes. I have more to say on that but I'll keep it to myself for now.
Also, I'm not a fan of killing for sport either but for population control it's a little different if you ask me. However, I don't see a problem with using "some" dogs for hunting. Because, after all, aren't "some" dogs naturally hunters?
I'm not trying to offend or make anyone upset and if I have, I appologize.
|
|
|
|
Post by RealPitBull on Oct 18, 2011 11:49:51 GMT -5
Kevin, nothing offensive at all about what you are saying. And I love discussing this stuff. If you want to start a thread specifically on hog hunting, please feel free.
But if we are to talk about gameness, the APBT, activites that could test for gameness (ie. hog hunting), and the humane/inhumane aspects of various means of "legal" testing, I actually think the dicussion fits in this thread and we can just keep it going here.
|
|
|
|
Post by emilys on Oct 18, 2011 12:05:05 GMT -5
I see where everyone is coming from on this and thanks for not chewing my head off. mhaze: Thanks for answering my questions and I agree continuing to talk about hog hunting will take this thread off topic. I see why you say Pit Bulls wouldn't be the ideal catch dog and I understand why you feel that it is inhumane. Mary: Thanks for chiming in also. Emilys: "I understand why the pit bull hoghunters want to call it a test of "gameness" because it does engage the dog's courage/determination and there is the threat of injury." That's essentially what I meant. I would like to continue a discussion on this but not here because I don't want to clutter this thread with nonsense. One thing I would like to say though is the way I see it, in nature dogs are predators and animals like hogs are prey. If humans weren't here dogs would naturally hunt prey animals, they would kill them and eat them. Would the animal suffer? Most likely, but that is nature in my eyes. I have more to say on that but I'll keep it to myself for now. Also, I'm not a fan of killing for sport either but for population control it's a little different if you ask me. However, I don't see a problem with using "some" dogs for hunting. Because, after all, aren't "some" dogs naturally hunters? I'm not trying to offend or make anyone upset and if I have, I appologize. no offense taken at all. I guess my position is that what wild animals do is what wild animals do... so yes, predators kill other animals and it's not always "pretty". And dogs, being predators, will do what predators do... kill other animals. I find no fault with dogs doing what dogs do. My issue is with what WE as humans, and as the creators/owners of our pets allow them to do. Sure, our dogs chase/kill bunnies. I'm not happy when my dogs catch one. What makes me "itchy" is when humans use dogs to kill other animals, for OUR purposes. I don't have a problem with sighthounds naturally chasing/killing bunnies. I have a BIG problem with live lure coursing, which is essentially a sport in which humans enjoy watching their sighthounds chase/kill rabbits. Maybe this is a distinction without a difference. |
|
I look forward to learning much here