Do we know what we own? Discussions

see I think because of the recent attacks people are getting confused and emotional. Were the recent attacks by dogs to people not other dogs?...and Staffies are notoriously friendly towards people? we are talking about possible dog on dog aggression?

The relationship that has broken down is that there are to many ignorant twits owning breeds beyond their means. That and the over sensation caused by the press. Dog attacks happen and always have it's just when one of them happens it starts the ball rolling so every incident is mentioned.

What I guess is what I have continued to ask throughout is if you keep making changes in all the years to come you are gonna end up with just one bog standard dog that 'fits all'? A softie that is as easy to train as possible. Like an easy option?...What will happen to all the willful, stubborn, independent, exuberant dogs?...dogs with high prey drives, strong instincts to run and run, guardian breeds...etc etc?...If you carry on with the formula to keep changing breeds to suit after they have long been established you are going to loose alot of individuality amongst breeds arn't you?

Show an Otterhound a umm Otter and it will probably go after it wont it?...I think there is a difference in a dog not being used for what it was originally intended and trying to alter temperaments.

I thought that the dog fighting aspect was delt with when dog fighting was outlawed, they no longer do the job? What's wrong with just leaving it there and then acknowledging the fact they need an understanding owner who can train and control them?

I think I said this before aswell when you mentioned something similar earlier: in my opinion there are many frustrated dogs living in the wrong enviroment for their breed...that just means to me that certain people should opt for a different breed

I don't want to see all unique traits bred out of dogs. However, we're not talking a trait here, we're talking aggression.

Aggression (both toward dogs and humans) should not be bred, trained or nurtured into any dog regardless of the breed. Staffords are just as dangerous toward humans as any other breed and more dangerous toward dogs than most.

Aggression should not be tolerated. It's CRUEL to the animal concerned and dangerous to those around it. Full stop!

There are no more "right" environments for aggressive breeds any more. That's my point. It is cruel to allow a dog to have aggressive tendencies that it cannot express. And it is no longer acceptable for these dogs to express their aggression. (Unless you live around my way where the gang boys wind each other up with their hard man trophy dogs).

It means exactly that hayley.

You have 4 dogs and 2 rooms.

2 dogs are dog aggressive and 2 dogs are not.

In one room you put the two dog aggressive dogs and in the other you put the non aggressive dogs.

What do you think will happen in each room? The dog aggressive dogs will fight, and likely end in one of them dying. Why? Because a dog fight took place!

just come in and retunred to this thread - and about 6 pages ago I was slated for being a lazy owner and not being bothered to control my dog aggressive staffy so in answer to that Hayley

Here flippin here Luke - thankyou for saying what I was thinking and trying to say all along.

I adore my dog with all his staffie traits and whether you like it or not Hayley, Bruno's aggression is not just from his genes its from his early upbringing - I think that has been proven in his acceptance of some bitches through very slow and gradual socialisation - if he had this from the beginning I TRULY beleive he wouldnt be aggressive now - not 100% bomb proof- but genuinely what dog is - a dog can always not get on with another it happens all the time cos after all its a dog.

I truly get the impression that you actually enjoy the agressiveness of your staffie

and on that note "scum???" - how dare you accuse someone who loves their dog and doesnt want to encourage its aggressiveness as scum.......?? what planet are you on

I am now leaving this argument as you clearly do not and will never change your mind and I only hope that your dogs do not fall prey to being bred for their aggressiveness and I dont see them or their pups in rescue in years to come after being owned by idiots who wanted them for nothing more than their aggressiveness and not for their true "stafford spirit" as you put it !


In answer to the original question - do I know what I own - yes i do - a fantastic dog who sadly due to a bad start in life is dog aggressive. Would I then breed from him to further this trait - certainly not.

Do I support your comments and theories on dog aggressiveness being a promotable trait in the staffie - NO

why is it anymore cruel to control situations that may bring out dog on dog aggression than it is to say stop a highly prey driven dog chasing after sheep, which is also unacceptable?

All dogs have to be controlled in some manor to suppress different urges that are undesirable.

If you admire the breed and your aware that they sometimes can be dog aggressive and they turn out that way are you being cruel wanting to own one? Or do you take it on board as one of the possibilities that may arise from owning such a breed and control the dogs behavior?

would the dog fight not have taken place in the first place because the idiot allowed it to happen by putting the two dog aggressive dogs in a room where they were let to be out of control?

Or maybe it wouldn't have happened if the idiots didn't breed dog aggession in the first place

Because, god forbid, if you happen to lose that control (eg you fall over, another dog aggressive dog runs up to yours and attacks) your dog, other dogs and possibly people "in the way" may be seriously injured or killed. Why should I place my dog and other dogs at risk when there is no need to?

Surely you're not saying that only certain breeds can be aggressive (either dog or human)? Every dog, whatever the breed, is capable of aggressing and injuring in the "right" circumstances. Is every dog owner cruel for wanting a dog?

agreed again. certainly do not breed them for the sole purpose of dog aggression. But at the same time leave the breed as it is. Is there any need to change it more now.

Dog fighting and similar sports have been banned since the mid 1800's haven't they and Staffies have gotten on just fine ever since, why do they need to change now?

I still think people need to change only.

Don't activley seek to add dog aggression and yet don't actively to change what they are. I have been trying to learn more about them throughout the topic and keep looking at lots of websites with the description of the Staffie and pretty much all of them say within the temprament section that they can be aggressive towards other animals, isn't it just a fact of the SBT?

It's then up to people to decide how to deal with that possible fact. To excentuate it in their dogs own behaviour and exploit the breed (idiots) or to understand it can lay beneth the surface but can be controlled hence why the breed also has 'totally reliable' written in it's standard, this seems to me to be a balanced dog in the right hands and primarily what you get from it is how it is raised and from there how you keep control of your dog.

Of course I'm not saying that :? I have said many times that any breed is capable of aggression...I mentioned earlier that if in the wrong hands for the wrong reasons my notoriously friendly breed could still turn.

What I was saying if you are going to own a dog from a breed where clearly it states in the temprament that they can be aggressive to other animals then you should be more prepared for that than if you are looking at owning a dog that is notoriously dog friendly and has less chance of having aggression to other animals. You know, lessen the chances of your dog being that way if it is something you can't live with.

Yes, dog fighting is illegal but come to my neighbourhood and you'll see it alive, well and flourishing. If staffies weren't dog aggressive they'd be at less risk of being used by the "idiots". The idiots choose aggressive breeds to fight with. Why give them what they want?

Again, all dogs "can" be aggressive towards other animals (I'm not saying staffies don't have aggression issues here, just reminding you that they don't have a monopoly on it ) that's just a fact of the species. They're opportunistic hunter/scavengers.

It is outlawed, but it still goes on even today. I wish people could change, the whole macho bravdo crap gets on my nerves - its a symptom of a very unhealthy society. If there are any monsters out there then we've created them, well, not all of us

But there's always hope, and that's where change comes in. So yes, responsible breeders are needed to rectify the mistakes of the ill-informed or misguided or plain right stupid.

The idiots are going to be interested in that breed purely because it was developed for dog fighting in the first place. Like I said earlier you could wave a magic wand overnight and give the Staffie guaranteed zero aggression and tomorrow you will still have these silly idiots trying to use them that way. Are these idiots really following the breed closely to know anything different other than what is attractive to them...The fact that they were originally bred for dog fighting.

I never thought that there were 'aggressive breeds' just dogs taken from breeds with certain traits that have been exploited same as with the guardian breeds, again often exploited by idiots.

Do the authorities know of this rampant dog fighting in your area? What is being done to control the ownership of the dogs for wrong reasons?

I have 4 Border Collies.

Three of them would`nt know a sheep from an elephant and have`nt a clue what herding means.
They are still Border Collies though, with all the brains and charm the breed holds for me.

I also have a Lurcher.
He thinks small furries, including my mogs, are for snuggling up to, not for chasing and killing.

I have the dogs I love and adore, with the `breed` traits I want, and without the ones I dont need or want them to have.

It does not make them `lesser` examples of their heritage as far as I`m concerned. I have no sheep and I don`t hunt, so my dogs don`t need to be able to do those tasks.

Anyone thinking a breed `needs` to have aggression as part of their `charm` needs to understand what has been said so many times but is not being heard on this thread from what I can see - the traits in our dogs today were bred or beaten in to them over hundreds of years.
They are man made, pure and simple. And now `man` is finding some of those traits biting us in the butt [ pun intended ! ].

There is no breed `charm` in dog aggressive traits or behaviours forced on them through mans interference, either through breeding from dogs with genetic problems - yes, its problems which create `natural born` aggression, not healthy lines - or from treating them in ways which make them deliberately dog aggressive.
The sooner man breeds out any such manufactured genetic traits [ iow illness ], and stops finding amusement in dogs killing each other, the better for all dogs everywhere.

IMO, if a dog - Bull breed or otherwise, is actually born with aggressive tendencies rather than developing them through experiences [ or lack of ], then that dog has something medically wrong which needs help, not anyone accepting or extolling it as a breed `virtue`.

Just my opinion.

I agree Azz I wish there was more we could do to rid our world of idiots who will make bad out of all things in life that are otherwise fine without their involvement.

That's not strictly true. The idiots around here like their dogs big, the bigger the better. They use staffies to cross with larger bull breeds and as "training" dogs for their larger fighters. ie They let their really mean fighters rip staffies apart for the practice. Already staffies are less attractive to them than the Pitts and Amstaffs.

I live one street away from one of the largest police stations in London. (My puppy is well socialised to police sirens 24/7 :smt001 ) However, with gang crime high, crimes against dogs aren't top of their list :? .