Do we know what we own? Discussions

lol@your toots Luke.

I think there is a bit of a misunderstanding somewhere as I see it.

Hayley are your dogs well mannered and well trained and well brought up?...

There is a difference between letting dogs run riot causing choas and accepting that they can be dog aggressive because of it's origins, isn't there?...I hope?

Lets just hope you don't encounter any problems with yours then.....Because I'd hate them to back down going on every word thats been said because then they wouldnt be Staffords, right?

This has sparked something-yes i am being sparked a lot tonight!
A dog is meant to be a well manered member of society (in its own way), yes? A pleasure to own, a pleasure to walk, a pleasure to be around, a dog that is happy in all situations-yes?
A dog agressive dog, whether it be a stafford or a bloody black lab-is a dog with 'tainted behaviour'. Any dog posessing such traits is seen as a 'nuiscance' a 'danger' a 'liability' by the public-staffords get bad press from the public/press a lot-yar?
Well, IMO, thats exactly why! Too many untrained, bad mannered, ill tempered, poorly bred staffords going around with macho men, chavs and general fools! These dogs have bad behaviour and show agressive tendencies yes? Therefore are seen, as any dog who does so would be, as a danger/liability/nuiscance by the public. Which leads me to say, that anyone who allows/accepts/and even encourages such behaviour in a stafford-is the backbone to why they receive such a bad review by the general public and press.
JMO
Also i think its rather an idiotic and insulting statement to say that those who would allow their breed to be altered for the better of the breed are bad owners/do not love their dogs/nor care about the preservation of the breed/s they so honestly love.

mys noone will answer because they are NOT LISTENING or READING what me or even you are trying to say

I agree with most of it, but a stafford does not need to fight another dog for me to prove it has spirit,
When challenged i don't expect mine to back down,except when i give the command.
It's called training,yes it may have instinct the same as most breeds but isn't that why we train them?
And if staffords are so dog aggressive why are there children handling in the showring?

As I have already pointed out I attend a handling class on fortnightly basis, "No two dogs or more could be left unleaded or unsupervised without a fight taking place" Those who attend this class are not pseudo-dogfighters but genuine doglovers who are AWARE of their charges instincts and take ALL necessary precautions to avoid confrontation. Would I wish to remove anything from my present dogs, "NO I would not" My dog Glory will be 5 years old in November my bitch B is 2 years old neither have EVER been involved in any incident regarding dogs or otherwise. I try as best I can to furnish them with exercises which mirror their inbuilt need/love of combat, "Springpole/Flirtpole ect" Why if I love/care for something would I wish to eradicate their love, "Enjoyment" of hard vigourous exercise and need of combat no matter how artificial it may be. I want my dogs for "THEMSELVES!!!" not what I can force them to be.
The nothing else changed question: It has taken centuries to arrive at our present dogs. How does anyone propose to alter their psyche? With The Staffordshire bull terrier you KNOW what you have or should do it is YOUR responsibility to do the best you can to let him LIVE his birthright, "to be happy and content in his OWN body and mind and not in yours.

Personally, now this is JMO, but anyone who has a stafford from a pup and doesn't discourage nor train them not to be, dog agressive in my eyes has not trained them nor raised them correctly-and are merely taking the easy option as to have an excuse for a dog agressive/viscious (?) dog cause they can say "Oh yes they will do that, cause there a stafford!"
Having a dog agressive rescue is totally different, however.

mys my dogs are under control, they dont fight any dogs that walk by and they are 99 percent of the time well mannered!
If i see another dog i turn the other direction and rain my dogs in firmly! I know what my dogs are capable of so therefor i control it and avoid it! I expect and respect what my dogs are, i dont pretend they are something that they are not
Im not ever gonna be a stafford owners who only expect the good parts but expects every part

luke and nicci ive not read your posts as to me its seem as thou you could never understand, i expect that from luke but not so much you nicci as to be honest i thought u understood bull breeds .....

As i sorta said earlier, each breed is predisposed to certain charcteristics, it is an owners job to 'steer the dog in the right direction'. I had a working Jack Russell Terrier for many moons, was an excellent dog-fast as lightning with a strong bite, she was a rescue but had a working background-i par trained her. She was worked to mainly rats, mice n rabbits etc, however lived for many years with X amounts of rabbits n guinea-pigs (i used to show and breed) living alongside her, i culd trust her 100% with them because i had trained her to know the difference-i had trained her the right, from the wrong.
With any breed we know they will retain certain charcteristics from the past of when they fullfilled a certain purpose-however that doesn't mean that when such a charcateristic could be responsible for the breeds future hanging in the balance, i think such charcteristics should not be allowed/encouraged nor accepted.

Sweeping statement, i may be young yes but by no means am i uninformed, stupid or an idiot. I know the breed, i love the breed but im not blind to their foibles. AND unlike some (!) i do care about the future of the stafford, people who hold an opinion that they should be allowed and expected to be dog agressive, IMO,are the ones who are going to destroy it!
Also-i've been around staffords a lot longer than you my friend, have read every book imaginable, spoke to some of the top breeder and judges, seen some of the top dogs from all around the world-therefore, i think my opinion is a valid one.

HI luke I agree with you up until the ... that I included to separate the paragraphs.

I agree that breeds have certain characteristics bred into them so that they can then be shaped by us humans for certain jobs.

I also agree that we do indeed show them how to do those jobs and without us encouring those actions the job wouldn't get done!

A Husky doesn't just strap it's self up to a rig and know that is is suppossed to pull people and loads around...

BUT...

It's characteristics that allow us to use it for the job it was intended are partly that it needs to run over long distances and have endurance and a desire to run and keep running (or else they wouldn't get people very far)

While you might not see a Husky strapping it's self to a rig all it's characteristics for the job are there and affect how we own them...Such as they can't be let off lead in open spaces etc. You can train them all you like but unless you are fooling yourself you will never let a Husky off lead. No one teaches a Husky that it must run and keep going but that is it's instinct it's what they enjoy.

Why is that more acceptable than admitting Staffies are not really dog friendly and were never bred to be that way?

Attended stafford shows for many moons-saw one fight (and a poxy one at that!) break out in all those years, and that was food related if my memory serves me correct-and between two dogs that were there with the same breeder/exhibitor.

luke you were a baby when your parents owned staffords and dont get me started on top judges as thanks to the show world the physical apparence has been ruined! so our views will clash BIG TIME ...

I think the best analogy I can make here is, "Why would anyone purchase a Greyhound then set about converting it into a Tortoise?" but that is the contrary human for you.

Considering the last stafford died 6..maybe 7 years ago i wouldn't say i was a baby when we had staffords at all Hayley. Missinformed i think.
The breeds appearance has changed acceptedlly, however these rangy, long legged staffords you so seem to like-and granted many others do too, to me and a lot of other folk look like 'pit types' and are EXACTLY why there are innocent dogs, that are far from a pit bull, being seized and destroyed because their owners parade them around like an accesory-and because of the fact the look vastly different to the breed they are meant to be.

Since my credentials are required. This is my third staffie. I've lived with dogs all my life including GSDs and other terriers too. Staffies are my breed of choice, I love them to bits, and I hope never to be without one :-D As I said in an earlier post in this thread I lived 12 years with a dog aggressive stafford.

I live in an area in London where I am surrounded by people (mainly boys from rival gangs) who have staffs, pits, amstaffs, rotties and various X's as trophy hard man dogs where they are trained to be dangerous. My little staffie puppy needs protecting on the street from dogs almost 10 times her size wanting to have a go at her. If you want to witness a lot of bull breeds with their aggression nurtured come into my neighbourhood and then ask me what I know about staffs. (Sorry - raw nerve here - I see too many mistreated bull breeds every day. I see lads beating their dogs in public and winding their dogs up against each other and I am not surprised when I hear about dogs attacking humans) I HATE what I see happening to the breeds I love on my streets.

I know very well that no dog, whatever the breed, is bomb proof with other dogs or humans.

Oh I do Hayley, although I dont fully think that you actually do.

I live in a multiple household, one where all the dogs are happy in the presence of each other and other dogs. I would really be a crap owner if they couldnt live without confrontations, spats or within the presence of another dog, lets not forgot that my household of dogs is a mixed one made up of dogs that live with each other bred for different purposes.

If I didnt understand my dogs and tolerated what any other person would deem as unaceptable - I would have failed my dogs miserably!

Surely appearence is as big a factor of the 'stafford you apparentlly love' as temperament and personality yes?
But your saying you don't like it? Does this mean you don't like a factor of the breed? DIdn't you say more or less with a stafford you accept it for everything, and if you don't like a certain factor choose a different breed?
And don't say you like the olde tyme (why the hell do people spell it that way?) or irish or long legged staffords-cause at the end of the day a stafford is as the standard says, no different.
Before anyone starts also, i am aware plenty of breeds are bred with a certain appearence (JRT, patterdale, fell etc) and they aren't KC recognised, however they still have a standard and folk wouldn't dream of wanting a different looking dog-you have a breed, you have it the way it looks-not a dog that looks barely like what its meant too! !

I see exactly what you are saying and why you can get upset...But wether the Satffie is naturally dog aggressive or not at this point in time probably has no bearing on what these ****heads are doing with their dogs...They are attracted to the Staffie because it originated as a fighting dog...To make it unappealing to these neds you are going to have to re-write the whole history and totally blank out the fact of why they originated, which is to late now.

Whether you start breeding Staffies in a different way now or not wont change the way they exploit these breeds.

Education and empathizes on responsible dog ownership and training are what is needed.

If you are a responsible owner of a guarding breed you are aware that you need proper training to be in control so that it doesn't go around attacking everyone that comes near...It's when people exploit certain characteristics to exaggerate the dogs actions that is the problem, so I think you need to deal with the people not the breed.

Even if you could wave a magic wand to make Staffies zero dog aggressive tomorrow they will still fall victim to ******s believing if they agitate the dog enough it will rise to the occasion, they wont loose there appeal to these idiots no matter what.

What nonsense. He has no birthright to 'kill' another dog. It's been bred into him by idiots, and ultimately will be bred out of him by responsible breeders who actually give a damn about the breed.

Losing the aggressive tendancies won't change his prey drive or ability to excerise, or somehow make him into a less capable dog. Take greyhounds for example, they have a massive chase/prey drive (not saying I agree with it) but they have no dog aggression. Take Border Collies, Gundogs or indeed any other highly driven breed. None of them have dog aggression inbuilt yet they are more than capable of enjoying a full highly charged life.

Your argument doesn't hold up at all.

Losing the dog aggression will not hurt the breed (as my paragraph above demonstrates). But it will help save it, and if you really cared about it, you'd see it.