pit bull, dog aggression, and obsession with ball???

Thank you, sillysally and all others who KNOW what it can be like with pit bulls.

I am so done with arguing with you, awsomedog. I hope that you continue to give your dog "what it needs" and that corrects all genetic behaviors (even though you have NO idea what could trigger DA in pit bulls) that might occur.

My dog, at best, is dog selective, as I have stated. Even through working with her, the messed up thing is, I may NEVER know what makes her like certain dogs and hate others. And since she IS dog selective, I probably will never know. Therefore, since I recognize her tendancies and the fact that she IS dog selective, do I win any credibility in your book? Or to do that would I just have to simply ignore the fact that she's dog selective, take her to a dog park and allow her to run around off leash and attack whatever dog she likes, to know anything about pit bulls and be anti-BSL??
That's craaaaazy.


No amount of your experience is going to change my mind and make me think that my attitude promotes BSL and that I have NO experience with pit bulls.

ORIGINAL: JM

That last sentence in the post was pretty interesting.

"[color="#000000"] training and early socialization has only a minor effect on how dog aggressive a specific pit bull will become once it matures." [/color]

I would think that the OP would always have to be working with this then?

Or at least, it may be a probability that her work addressing DA via trainer may be ongoing?

Yes. It probably will be ongoing. It probably will require that once (and strongly, if) Ella does well with my trainer's dog and they can even play off leash together one day, that even though she gets along with that dog, doesn't mean she's going to love any dog that she comes across. With this training, I'm hoping that Ella can gain confidence around other dogs to at best ignore them or not at least act violently around them. I'm also hoping to gain some confidence in being with my dog around other dogs. I need that. I don't mean to have misled anyone, Ella's training is just as much for me as it is for her.
It's never JUST genetic. Left alone, a pit bull's tendancy for DA can get out of hand. If a professional and owner work with a pit bull, it can often become manageable or even changed. It all depends on what in the environment is triggering that tendancy for DA. And if you're lucky enough to figure it out.

Most of the people I know with pits do this:

1. They don't go to small, urban-style dog runs. The energy just runs too high in too-small an area.
2. They watch their dogs very carefully when they play. They make sure play doesn't get too intense, and they only play with dogs whose owners understand that there is a risk.
3. They know how to use a break-stick or otherwise break up a dogfight safely.
4. They don't leave their dogs with other dogs unattended.

And they don't mind doing this. They are happy people with happy dogs. Their dogs are model citizens, in part because their owners help them to be that way.

And the folks I know whose dogs have attacked other dogs just don't let their dogs play with most or all other dogs, and have successfully taught their dogs to ignore other dogs on the street. Again, this does not impact the lives of the dogs or the owners. It's a straightforward managment issue that is handled without making any value judgements about the breed being maligned or any other such nonsense.

Well, it really sounds like you are aware of the breeds capabilities and the work that may be involved. 

So, you can put me in the "don't worry so much" camp.

ORIGINAL: chewbecca

ORIGINAL: JM

That last sentence in the post was pretty interesting.

"[color="#000000"][font="arial, helvetica, sans-serif"] training and early socialization has only a minor effect on how dog aggressive a specific pit bull will become once it matures." [/color]

I would think that the OP would always have to be working with this then?

Or at least, it may be a probability that her work addressing DA via trainer may be ongoing?

Yes. It probably will be ongoing. It probably will require that once (and strongly, if) Ella does well with my trainer's dog and they can even play off leash together one day, that even though she gets along with that dog, doesn't mean she's going to love any dog that she comes across. With this training, I'm hoping that Ella can gain confidence around other dogs to at best ignore them or not at least act violently around them. I'm also hoping to gain some confidence in being with my dog around other dogs. I need that. I don't mean to have misled anyone, Ella's training is just as much for me as it is for her.
It's never JUST genetic. Left alone, a pit bull's tendancy for DA can get out of hand. If a professional and owner work with a pit bull, it can often become manageable or even changed. It all depends on what in the environment is triggering that tendancy for DA. And if you're lucky enough to figure it out.

I don't know if this is something Millan himself would actually say but it has been heavily implied, if not outrightly stated, many times in this forum that there are really only 3 reasons why a dog does anything wrong, ever (including aggression, property destruction, etc): 1. Lack of exercise or breed-specific jobs, 2. Lack of leadership by the handler, 3. Negative emotional or "energy" influence of the handler (eg, coddling, anxiety, etc). I think this is where Awsomedog is coming from wrt to the dog aggression issue. Millan's show portrays all dog problems as handler problems, so there is no genetic imprint for dog aggression - except in extremely rare cases of mentally ill dogs I would suppose. As I've said before in another thread, his notion is of whole Dog, a perfect being who is only corrupted at the hands of humans. I likened him to St. Augustine, & maybe it's a bit Platonic too. It's very much untethered to the sort of guts & bones everyday business of dog breeding and individual temperament and so on.

Blimey, what an eye opening post.  It reminds me of the difference btwn the DH and myself.....  While I subscribe to the idea that "pupil can only be as good as the master" and if the dogs screws up I usually link it back to something I did wrong in handling him, the DH does not subscribe to this at all.  When I've berated him for correcting the dog when I think it is inappropriate and telling him it's his fault, he has said "Don't be ridiculous.  Dogs aren't perfect any more than we are.  They screw up sometimes and do stupid things.  Sometimes they need to learn there's a consequence to that".  Makes me wonder if I am placing the dog on a pedestal by always taking responsibility for any slip..... (????)
 
Considering what Pits were originally bred for, what breed specific job do you give them when rehabbing?  Or would it just be generally more stimulation.  Has CM ever addressed this in his show? 

St. Augustine! Yes! Very good description.

I think that this is one source of the divisiveness that's been plaguing this forum lately. I would be curious to hear someone talk from the Whole Dog side of the fence about this issue. Why is every issue a handler issue? What does that philosophical platform give you?

I am not asking to judge. I am genuinely curious. What Jones is describing is something about the CM Way that I have a really hard time understanding. And I know how to talk about the other side of the fence. I know what thinking about things in Skinnerian terms gives me... mostly patience and emotional distance.

Maybe some kind of common ground is here somewhere?

Maybe you're on to something but it's going way OT.... maybe that deserves a thread of it's own in a more general section.....?

well, if you consider that pitts are bred to encourage DA genes, that would be corruption at the hands of humans wouldn't it?

I am not agreeing nor disagreeing with you, just offering a counterpoint.

ORIGINAL: jones

I don't know if this is something Millan himself would actually say but it has been heavily implied, if not outrightly stated, many times in this forum that there are really only 3 reasons why a dog does anything wrong, ever (including aggression, property destruction, etc): 1. Lack of exercise or breed-specific jobs, 2. Lack of leadership by the handler, 3. Negative emotional or "energy" influence of the handler (eg, coddling, anxiety, etc). I think this is where Awsomedog is coming from wrt to the dog aggression issue. Millan's show portrays all dog problems as handler problems, so there is no genetic imprint for dog aggression - except in extremely rare cases of mentally ill dogs I would suppose. As I've said before in another thread, his notion is of whole Dog, a perfect being who is only corrupted at the hands of humans. I likened him to St. Augustine, & maybe it's a bit Platonic too. It's very much untethered to the sort of guts & bones everyday business of dog breeding and individual temperament and so on.

Considering what Pits were originally bred for, what breed specific job do you give them when rehabbing? Or would it just be generally more stimulation. Has CM ever addressed this in his show?

 
I was wondering the same... can't say that I know.
 

well, if you consider that pitts are bred to encourage DA genes, that would be corruption at the hands of humans wouldn't it? I am not agreeing nor disagreeing with you, just offering a counterpoint.

 
I understand what you're saying. I can't really answer that either... I think it leads to a sort of hypothetical ad infinitum logical absurdity... if you start down that road it quickly leads you to -  is domesticated dog a corrupted wolf? Let's just leave that one alone, shall we?... [sm=rofl.gif]

I actually think it's relevant, JM... although I understand Jones' point.

I think there is a difference between humans being responsible for dogs and each individual dog being perfect/corrupted by a bad handler. Examples:

1. Some neighbors of mine breed really human and dog aggressive pit bulls and should be punished to the highest degree possible because I am sure most of these dogs wind up dying in the fighting ring or at the hands of cops (who routinely shoot dangerous dogs around here), or at the animal shelter.

But the dogs they make are, by and large, not for rehab. They are really freaking mean. They're dangerous.

2. Puppy mills breed dogs badly and treat them like livestock and not like domestic pets when they are young and at a crucial stage of development. Many, but not all, puppy mill dogs will pee and poo in their crates, be really hard to housetrain, have a hard time learning bite inhibition, have a hard time with other dogs, etc. etc. etc. etc.

People who own puppy mills are responsible for making dogs that it's hard to want in your family for very long, and are responsible, therefore, with a large part of the dog overpopulation problem. But there is no way I am going to go "save" a pet store puppy because I don't want to deal with a puppy that can't keep itself clean and has over the top remedial socialization to do.

These are two examples of human beings being responsible for creating dogs that exhibit behaviors that most humans find problematic, to the point of not wanting the dogs in their house in the first place. This is not a handler issue--any handler is going to find that a petstore puppy will poop all over itself. Any handler is going to find my neighbor's dogs really, really mean.

Does that help?

ORIGINAL: Chuffy
Considering what Pits were originally bred for, what breed specific job do you give them when rehabbing?  Or would it just be generally more stimulation.  Has CM ever addressed this in his show? 

Pits were not just bred for fighting.  They are very athletic dogs that were also bred for general farm work.  A huge number of them enjoy weight pulling, agility, tracking, even herding.  Many (not mine though) enjoy fetch with a ball or frisbee.

I've heard that bully breeds do great with weight pull and really enjoy it. I think that would be a good breed-appropriate sport to suggest for a pit who needed a job to do.

ORIGINAL: sillysally

ORIGINAL: Chuffy
Considering what Pits were originally bred for, what breed specific job do you give them when rehabbing?  Or would it just be generally more stimulation.  Has CM ever addressed this in his show? 

Pits were not just bred for fighting.  They are very athletic dogs that were also bred for general farm work.  A huge number of them enjoy weight pulling, agility, tracking, even herding.  Many (not mine though) enjoy fetch with a ball or frisbee.

 
Hmmmm, I was under the understanding that they were bred for fighting, but also found to be good at general farm work.
 
An interesting perspective, going back to what was said earlier about it being responsible to face up to the history of the breed and how it impacts on it today in terms of how it should be handled, trained, socialised, managed.....  I was looking at a few websites of Pit breeders and they really big up the other things the dog was found to be good at and ignore or skim over what the dog was originally bred for..... It seems this attitude is rife, undoubtedly because Pits get a bad enough rap as it is and they don't wish to add fuel to the fire.  Even the breed standard glosses over the uglier side of the breeds history.  IMO though, this approach is counter productive.  Sorry if that's OT.

ORIGINAL: Chuffy

ORIGINAL: sillysally

ORIGINAL: Chuffy
Considering what Pits were originally bred for, what breed specific job do you give them when rehabbing? Or would it just be generally more stimulation. Has CM ever addressed this in his show?

Pits were not just bred for fighting. They are very athletic dogs that were also bred for general farm work. A huge number of them enjoy weight pulling, agility, tracking, even herding. Many (not mine though) enjoy fetch with a ball or frisbee.

Hmmmm, I was under the understanding that they were bred for fighting, but also found to be good at general farm work.

An interesting perspective, going back to what was said earlier about it being responsible to face up to the history of the breed and how it impacts on it today in terms of how it should be handled, trained, socialised, managed..... I was looking at a few websites of Pit breeders and they really big up the other things the dog was found to be good at and ignore or skim over what the dog was originally bred for..... It seems this attitude is rife, undoubtedly because Pits get a bad enough rap as it is and they don't wish to add fuel to the fire. Even the breed standard glosses over the uglier side of the breeds history. IMO though, this approach is counter productive. Sorry if that's OT.

It's NOT off topic to me.
Yes, it is hard to even find a reputable source for APBT breeding on the net. Most breeder sites out there promote the tougher, meaner image of the dog. Heck, I don't know that I've ever come across a reputable breeder's site of a TRUE APBT. Most are the big huge, fat heads, that have almost bowed legs and look like they're in extreme pain. It's weird because most of the informative sites that I go to about the breed, tell it like it is. They do not mess around in telling the truth about pit bulls and their tendancy to be DA. But, having said that, the sites I reference the most are badrap.org and pbrc.net.

It is dangerous for people to go to either extreme with pit bulls. Because both extremes (pit bulls are vicious, killing machines vs. pit bulls are the sweetest dogs on the planet that wouldn't hurt a fly) are lies or exaggerations.
It is NOT wrong for those who love pit bulls to share the truth that a pit bull is most likely not going to be human aggressive and in fact are VERY human loving and obedient. But it is wrong to portray the pit bull so sweet as to not tell others of its ability to become dog aggressive.