[tat2stuff]

This is just to debate some possible solutions going forward to the massive problems this breed is facing today.

Don't take this in any negative way against the people who devote their time, lives, money to rescue and saving these poor dogs from their horrible situations, what your doing is extremely noble and kind. Nor a slight to the people who have successfully taken in wonderful dogs from shelters and rescues.

Do you think this breed needs a good house cleaning to survive? BYB's are filling the country with substandard, improperly tempered and unstable dogs. Shelters & rescues are overflowing with these dogs and millions of dollars are spent each year to sustain some very poor examples of the breed. Some of these dogs are re homed and make wonderful pets, some end up on the news, others back in the shelters or rescues. BSL is popping up everywhere because of the actions of these poorly bred dogs and their more poorly bred owners.

What are your thoughts on solving this huge overpopulation problem and degeneration of the gene pool of these dogs.

I'll start off with a few ideas to get things going, some of these may seem heartless at first, but look at the big picture and think about the survival of the breed as a whole before you answer:

all "pit bulls" that come into shelters and are not claimed by their owners in X days be PTS.

form and fund one large national organization(like the NRA) to fight BSL and launch positive ad campaigns with the money normally spent on shelter and rescue efforts.

require special licensing for breeders of APBT, SBT's, American Bullies, etc., and impose strict breeding regulations that limit numbers of litters, breeding stock, etc. Also implement heavy fines for unlicensed breeders(BYB) caught peddling substandard dogs.

confiscation of dogs and heavy fines for unfit owners found neglecting or misusing their dogs

ownership restrictions of these breeds ie. no one with prior felony or violent crime convictions.

[maryellen]

YES YES YES YES... this breed has needed a thorough housecleaning for a while now... the breed is going downhill faster then ever.. i saw it in the shelters i visited and dogs i tested, out of 10 dogs maybe MAYBE 3 would pass, and that was a huge maybe... i went to a local shelter once that had 4 pitbulls come in.. out of all 4, only one passed, and she only passed marginally in the shelter... once she got into a foster home she did much better, and was good to adopt out after a few months.. i have been to alot of shelters that have them in, and its pretty pathetic when 2 out of 5 will pass..

as far as breeders, they should all go thru a test and if they fail, they cant breed..... the breeds worst enemy is the breeder itself, as they are the ones creating this breed the way they are...

[Noelle's Mom]

I think some of these need to be done for ALL breeds of dogs not just specific breeds. Sounds too much like BSL to me. I do think there has to be some very heavy fines and punishments for those who do not do right by their animals.

Breeders who do not follow a moral guideline should lose their right to own animals period.

The only dogs that should ever be put to sleep are ones that are severely sick, or absolutely cannot be rehabilitated.

I agree about the criminal record thing, especially those with violent crimes and/or felonies.

I do not think ANY dog should be "owned" unless it is primarily a pet. If you want to show or compete in weight pulls and stuff that's fine too, but the number 1 priority should be to love your dog. In order to compete in any of these I think there should be a requirement that your dog be temperment tested and those that do not pass, do not get to compete. That way more people will socialize their dogs for any situation instead of just using them to get an extra buck or their 15 minutes in the spotlight.

[maryellen]

noelle's mom

The only dogs that should ever be put to sleep are ones that are severely sick, or absolutely cannot be rehabilitated. I agree about the criminal record thing, especially those with violent crimes and/or felonies. I do not think ANY dog should be "owned" unless it is primarily a pet. If you want to show or compete in weight pulls and stuff that's fine too, but the number 1 priority should be to love your dog. In order to compete in any of these I think there should be a requirement that your dog be temperment tested and those that do not pass, do not get to compete. That way more people will socialize their dogs for any situation instead of just using them to get an extra buck or their 15 minutes in the spotlight.

i do not agree with dogs only being "owned" unless it is primarily a pet.. breeders who do it right show their dogs based on the guidelines of the groups that made up the descriptions etc... you cant get the breeds right unless you breed true to standard, and if all dogs were pets there would be no more breed standards..

as far as the puttng to sleep theory, if a dog is born defective with missing limbs, or bad temperment, or bad health problems, its the breeders right to better the breed to have those that dont fit the standard euthanized..

unfortunately, humans feel that dogs and other animals are disposable, so until humans change their way of thinking, they will continue to dump their animals when they feel like it.

[Noelle's Mom]

I feel that what you are saying is an oxymoron. It's okay to put an animal to sleep because it was born missing a front leg or something, but that people are bad for feeling that animals are disposable? Isn't putting the animal to sleep disposing of it? Now, I can see having it fixed so that it cannot breed and cause more problems within the breed, but I'm sure there are many dogs out there who are not perfect physically that are still loved tremendously. As far as the temperment goes, that is along the lines of what I said with cannot be rehabilitated. Sometimes you have no choice but to put a dog down; I just believe every effort should be made to avoid that.

And I do not disagree with show dogs at all, I just disagree with people who have dogs only for show and the dogs never get the love and attention they deserve.

[maryellen]

there is no proof show people dont love their dogs like pet owners do. i know a few show owners who go above and beyond for their dogs more then some pet owners i know.

you have to understand, in breeding to better the breed a breeder will not keep a dog with 3 legs, or a cleft pallate, or any deformity. they cull them.. most will euthanize, and some will place the dog in a pet home .. however ,its hard enough finding homes for dogs with no deformities, let alone a dog with 3 legs..

some people prefer dogs with disabilities, some dont.. it basically comes down to betterment of the breed..

when people dump animals at shelters the dogs will probably be put to sleep.. when breeders get a litter and some are deformed they too are put to sleep...

its not an oxymoron,its the realities of dog breeds, every breeder of every breed will cull for deformities, color, or temperment.. they want to better the breed. humans who put their pets in a shelter because they dont want them anymore do so because they feel they can just get another one to replace the one that they didnt want anymore, they dont care about betterment of the breed..

[tat2stuff]

Originally Posted by Noelle's Mom I do not think ANY dog should be "owned" unless it is primarily a pet. If you want to show or compete in weight pulls and stuff that's fine too, but the number 1 priority should be to love your dog.

ok this is off topic, but ..what about farmers & herders that depend on dogs to maintain and guard their livestock, law enforcement that depends on dogs for narcotics and bomb detection, Homeland Security and Border Patrol that use dogs to protect our ports and borders, rescue workers that use dogs to find survivors in disasters, hunters that depend on dogs to flush and retrieve their game, people that depend on service dogs to get them through their daily life, therapy dogs that help the sick and elderly feel better, to name a few. Dogs have been used to "serve" man in "working " roles for thousands of years.

Back on topic, how many "working" dogs do you see in shelters or rescue, roaming the streets, mauling people, on the news. Now, how many of the ones owned as "primarily a pet" do you find there? TONS. I see a distinct pattern there. Dogs are canines not humans and have different needs and drives than we do, that can't be satisfied by love and kindness alone.

This would actually be another good topic for a debate though

[Noelle's Mom]

Nowhere am I saying that show dogs or working dogs are a bad thing. It's when people do not care about them as living creatures and just have them to earn a dollar or a moment in the spotlight that I get upset. I mean, Fiona is a clown dog so obviously I don't have a problem with dogs working. But she's also a loved and cared for part of our family.

[tat2stuff]

Originally Posted by Noelle's Mom Nowhere am I saying that show dogs or working dogs are a bad thing. It's when people do not care about them as living creatures and just have them to earn a dollar or a moment in the spotlight that I get upset. I mean, Fiona is a clown dog so obviously I don't have a problem with dogs working. But she's also a loved and cared for part of our family.

Don't take this as an insult to Fiona or yourself, but being a clown dog isn't what I would qualify as a working dog. The reality is, like it or not, "pet" quality dogs are usually the ones that don't measure up to the breeding standards. The dogs that meet or exceed are the ones that are used to show, work, and breed, the others are culled or sold as "pets". If those people didn't use those dogs for a "moment in the spotlight" most breeds would fall by the wayside. Providing their basic needs, exercise, and fulfillment of the dogs needs by letting them do what they've been breed to do is also caring about them and loving them as living creatures, even though you don't let them in the house or on the couch or smother them with human forms of affection.

[buddysmom]

Tat2 ... to your OP ... YES I agree!!!

Specifics should be discussed and refined, but a massive campaign along these lines is a must.

I believe this has to happen because I know of no other breed of "man's best friend" that humans have ever broght to such a horrible state, and it only seems to be getting worse.

I am in general against meddling in people's lives, whether from government or anyone else. But I think much of this can be avoided if this campaign comes from people who love the breed enough to want to save it in a meaningful way.

I belive it must include ABSOLUTE anti-dogfighting messages / measures. This campaign must define a future for the breed that addresses the elusive trait of "gameness." As long as the "game APBT" is the only "good APBT" and there is "only one way to test for gameness" (wink, nod, wink nod), the lunacy will continue. Everyone who thinks they are "the shit" because they have "game dogs" and they are "preserving the breed" can frankly go to hell IMO.

[bahamutt99]

Honestly, if I could choose whether this breed stays in the hands of pet owners, or if it goes back to being primarily a working dog, I would choose the latter. You almost never hear about serious competitors and working dog breeders having the kinds of problems that casual pet owners do. I suspect that its partly because they put a lot of work into their dogs, and partly because they're not afraid to cull a problem dog. (Or even if they don't cull it, they take their dogs as serious business, and the dog is kept in a situation where he's not going to be a danger.)

[tat2stuff]

Originally Posted by buddysmom I belive it must include ABSOLUTE anti-dogfighting messages / measures. This campaign must define a future for the breed that addresses the elusive trait of "gameness." As long as the "game APBT" is the only "good APBT" and there is "only one way to test for gameness" (wink, nod, wink nod), the lunacy will continue. Everyone who thinks they are "the shit" because they have "game dogs" and they are "preserving the breed" can frankly go to hell IMO.

I agree here to a point (and I don't condone dogfighting). Anti-dogfighting messages, yes I agree, but measures( I'm assuming you mean legislation and lawmaking) I am a little leary of. As seen by past proposed anti dog fighting legislation, they tend to grandstand the fighting aspect of the law and then sneak in restrictions that would effect ALL owners or the breed. Pit bull people dont read the whole proposal, think their doing a great thing for the breed by voting for this and find out later they could lose the right to own their dogs over it.

As far as "gameness" I think that meaning has misconstrued by a lot of todays pseudo "dog men". They are matching sub par dogs against sub par dogs and proclaiming the winner "game". The majority of dogs proclaimed "game" today would be considered curs by real Dog men of the past. True gameness is a very elusive trait, not many dogs show it. Just because a dog is "game breed" doesn't make him game.

People will always match dogs, they have been trying to stamp it out since the 1800's around the world with no success. A true APBT by definition is one that is breed for "gameness" and they are the dogs we know and love because of this breeding practice. The average person has never met nor could they handle a true game bred APBT. These dogs are not the ones wandering the streets or in shelters or the ones that figure into this overpopulation problem either. There will always be people testing their dogs and breeding for gameness(the way the old timers did, not the way todays wannabe thugs do) there is honestly no way to stop it.

[buddysmom]

People will always match dogs, they have been trying to stamp it out since the 1800's around the world with no success. A true APBT by definition is one that is breed for "gameness" and they are the dogs we know and love because of this breeding practice. The average person has never met nor could they handle a true game bred APBT. These dogs are not the ones wandering the streets or in shelters or the ones that figure into this overpopulation problem either. There will always be people testing their dogs and breeding for gameness(the way the old timers did, not the way todays wannabe thugs do) there is honestly no way to stop it.

Yeah people have been doing despicable things (like dogfighting) for centuries. So that makes it right?

Here's the "lowly street fighter" versus the "noble dogman" argument. I don't buy it. Both are cruel and vile.

Say there is a man who kills another by slow torture, and another who does it with a straight bullet to the forehead. it doesn't make what murderer #2 does right, just because he did it "better" than murderer number one.

Until people who claim to love the breed are willing to let go of the dogfighting mystique / reality / "necessity" / "I don't condone it BUT etc.etc. etc. (wink, nod) then this breed will not be saved.

IMHO.

[tat2stuff]

Originally Posted by buddysmom Yeah people have been doing despicable things (like dogfighting) for centuries. So that makes it right? Here's the "lowly street fighter" versus the "noble dogman" argument. I don't buy it. Both are cruel and vile. Say there is a man who kills another by slow torture, and another who does it with a straight bullet to the forehead. it doesn't make what murderer #2 does right, just because he did it "better" than murderer number one. Until people who claim to love the breed are willing to let go of the dogfighting mystique / reality / "necessity" / "I don't condone it BUT etc.etc. etc. (wink, nod) then this breed will not be saved. IMHO.

right or wrong, cruel or not, it is what it is, that was my point. If you take the chocolate out of a chocolate cake recipe, you're just going to end up with a bland cake when it's done. The "noble Dogmen" aren't the ones running the breed into the ground today or in the past. The true game dogs aren't the ones on the news or in the shelters and rescue. We need to focus our efforts where they will make the most impact. Yes, like it or not, there is a difference between the "noble Dogmen" and the "lowly street fighter". They aren't the one's mixing other breeds into the APBT, they aren't the one's making the dogs HA to guard their drug stashes, they aren't the ones facing off dogs on the street corners or fighting them in their back yards for all the neighbors to see, they aren't the ones filling the shelters and rescues with unstable mutts. They are however the ones who are breeding the best to the best, studying genetics, researching pedigrees, keeping their blood pure, guarding their pedigrees, breeding only for themselves to improve the line and not selling the dogs to anyone with $250, culling the dogs with poor temperaments, and preserving the true APBT. Dogfighting is a felony, cruel, and a terrible thing that shouldn't be done, but the breed is facing much bigger problems stemming from other sources. We all look at the world through different colored glasses, mine just don't happen to be rose.

[buddysmom]

I don't look at the situation through rose colored glasses.

It is just my opinion that in order to save the breed, advocates for the APBT need to move forward, and that means AWAY from that which (like it or not) is now a felony. Not just looking the other way. Moving the other way. Leaving the past behind and planning a new future.

Back you your OP, you suggest "require special licensing for breeders of APBT, SBT's, American Bullies, etc., and impose strict breeding regulations that limit numbers of litters, breeding stock, etc. Also implement heavy fines for unlicensed breeders(BYB) caught peddling substandard dogs."

Which I agree with. And here is a question: Would the hypothetical special license granted to the APBT breeders specifically prohibit matching? This was my point; I think it must address and prohibit it. And that means creating a new set of meaningful breeding guidelinees so we don't "take the chocolate out of the cake" so to speak.

[PNWPBR]

form and fund one large national organization(like the NRA) to fight BSL and launch positive ad campaigns with the money normally spent on shelter and rescue efforts. require special licensing for breeders of APBT, SBT's, American Bullies, etc., and impose strict breeding regulations that limit numbers of litters, breeding stock, etc. Also implement heavy fines for unlicensed breeders(BYB) caught peddling substandard dogs. confiscation of dogs and heavy fines for unfit owners found neglecting or misusing their dogs ownership restrictions of these breeds ie. no one with prior felony or violent crime convictions.

I agree with all of these, except this one.

all "pit bulls" that come into shelters and are not claimed by their owners in X days be PTS.

I worked very hard and for a long time to give these dogs a chance at the local shelter where I work.....

IMO, taking these dogs off the floor and not making the best of the best avaliable for adoption to the public is sending a very strong message. To me its saying (think like an uneducated person) "We believe Pit Bulls to be bad dogs and not fit for adoption, therefore we euthanize them for public safety."

That right there is enough to give those people that are anti-pit bull more ammo and more reasons to shout from the mountain tops: "The Humane Society doesn't even adopt them out, of course they should be banned in our city!"


Am I making any sense?

[Patch O' Pits]

Just some thoughts....

I wish there was a way to crack down on BYBs, I see BYBs as the #1 issue causing the problems. Not only do they just breed anything but they also don't screen homes or mentor new owners. Thus we get tons of people asking for help on forums and e-mailing for help which at least we have the forums to help however even more end up sending them to rescues , re homing , or dumping because they just are over matched

On another site I was on where I posted about red flags when looking for a breeder I was given some info I didn't know about some states having laws that make it OK to release pups once they are eating on their own and others at 6 weeks some at 7. The seven weeks one I could deal with and honestly in certain working home situations maybe younger but not much. However the average dog owner IMO doesn't have the time nor know how to be able to properly deal with such young pups. Maybe there needs to be enforced laws about how old a pup can be to place them. I think 8 weeks sis most ideal but would be happy with something at least close to that being enforced

AC needs to be more active in enforcing leash laws and picking up dogs running lose and fining the owners

Any sort of neglect and animal abuse needs to have not only jail time but time served cleaning cages at shelters

If the dog is being dumped for no good reason meaning it wasn't something like a death of owner, natural disaster, loss of home then the owner should have to pay for the care of that dog at the shelter until it is adopted or put down...Anyone who brings their dog to a shelter should have to hold the dog while he/she is put down if no good home is found and maybe that will help them understand better.

There should only be dangerous dog laws that cover all breeds and only dogs and owners that do something wrong

Now here is where it gets a bit tricky:

require special licensing for breeders of APBT, SBT's, American Bullies, etc., and impose strict breeding regulations that limit numbers of litters, breeding stock, etc. Also implement heavy fines for unlicensed breeders(BYB) caught peddling substandard dogs.

If only done for certain breeds that would be as bad as BSL though good intentioned. It also would be punishing the good breeders by sticking them under the microscope when they have done nothing wrong.

[screamin'eagle]

Yes this breed needs a good house cleaning. There are ignorant @ss people on both sides of the coin. There are idiots that knowingly do the wrong thing. There are idiots that breed unsound dogs for money. There are idiot that try to buy "pitbulls" for a tough guy image. There are idiots that take dogs home with no knowledge of coccidia, worms, parvo, etc, etc. There are idiots that think they are helping animals when they are only doing more harm. Rescues adopting dogs with unsound temperments because they're sad about seeing them euth'd, media reporting BS, and BYBs, BYBs, and BYBs again adding to all of this. I met a young lady that boughts two $50 bybed "pits" and claimed she did so to start her kennel. WTF? The only reason I stopped her was because the 7 week old pup was dragging his itchy ass on the ground with hookworms hanging out. She had no clue why her pup was so skinny with a fat belly, and you could literally see the worms hanging out of his ass. She needed to be culled along with her pups and whoever sold them to her talking about starting a kennel. She had no clue how those dogs were bred, unreg'd and she was starting a kennel. BS. I've seen ads on hoobly of a guy wanted to trade a 4-wheeler for 2 "blue pitz," and another guy offering a 7 mo. old blue bully at stud. If you really care about these dogs you need to close the circle. The same goes for the touchy feely types that run around saying its all in how they're raised. Its not all in how they're raised, and you're irresponsible as heck if you believe this, or propogate this. An unsound dog bred begets more unsound dogs, and you can love him all you want, but you gets pups with unsound temperments sold and bred time and again. Clean it up...close the circle!

[Miakoda]

Originally Posted by Noelle's Mom I feel that what you are saying is an oxymoron. It's okay to put an animal to sleep because it was born missing a front leg or something, but that people are bad for feeling that animals are disposable? Isn't putting the animal to sleep disposing of it? Now, I can see having it fixed so that it cannot breed and cause more problems within the breed, but I'm sure there are many dogs out there who are not perfect physically that are still loved tremendously. As far as the temperment goes, that is along the lines of what I said with cannot be rehabilitated. Sometimes you have no choice but to put a dog down; I just believe every effort should be made to avoid that. And I do not disagree with show dogs at all, I just disagree with people who have dogs only for show and the dogs never get the love and attention they deserve.

Is it fair to force a dog to live out it's entire life in a concrete and wire kennel getting hosed down once a day and having food and water thrust at it with minimal human contact? Is that living? That's exactly what "no kill" shelters are like.

Just because something is alive, doesn't mean it's living.

And if there were enough homes for every dog on this planet, then we wouldn't have stray dogs and dogs in shelters.

IMO the kindest act we can do for these dogs is to release them from the cruel and miserable world we force them to live in all because it makes some feel good that the dogs are alive.

[buddysmom]

Originally Posted by PNWPBR IMO, taking these dogs off the floor and not making the best of the best avaliable for adoption to the public is sending a very strong message. To me its saying (think like an uneducated person) "We believe Pit Bulls to be bad dogs and not fit for adoption, therefore we euthanize them for public safety." That right there is enough to give those people that are anti-pit bull more ammo and more reasons to shout from the mountain tops: "The Humane Society doesn't even adopt them out, of course they should be banned in our city!"

This is a good point.

Patch O Pits also makes a good point about the special breeding license being essentially BSL.

I actually wouldn't mind having breeding licenses required for ALL litters regardless of breed. I am usually not in favor of government regulation but the dog overpopulation has become such a crisis, not only from an animal welfare perspective but a public health perspective, that I feel it is necessary.

At least California is doing something about it.