I need information and statistics - PLEASE!

[alex221]

Originally Posted by TrishB

Why are "Pit Bull" and "Pit-bull-type" the only dogs that have both their purebred and their mixed counterparts combined? That obviously increases their numbers. Why aren't the "Pit-bull-type" dogs entered in the mix breed dogs? The "mix breed dogs" aren't broken down by their "type". It skews the numbers.

Trish, I originally thought the same as you, but then I realized they might be talking about the fact that 'Pitbull' can refer to the APBT, American Stafforshire Terrier, and Staffordshire Bull terrier which are all often 'lumped' into the 'Pitbull' breed.

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by alex221

Trish, I originally thought the same as you, but then I realized they might be talking about the fact that 'Pitbull' can refer to the APBT, American Stafforshire Terrier, and Staffordshire Bull terrier which are all often 'lumped' into the 'Pitbull' breed.

But that's the problem, they are NOT.

The American Staffordshire Terrier is an AKC and CKC recognized breed, with a known studbook, heritage and bloodlines. The Staffordshire Bull Terrier is as well and is actually an older breed than the Am. Staff. The American Pit Bull Terrier is recognized by the UKC.

Saying that you can "lump" 2 recognized purebreds into one, along with an unrecognized breed is wrong. It's like saying that they can group all of the Mollosar breeds together because they're the same "type". Or Wire coated breeds and so on. Heck - why not just group together the Working Group, call them all one, total their bites and have a field day?

These breeds are DIFFERENT BREEDS. They are no more the same as each other than any other dog in the same group as another. It's unacceptable. It's the lack of delineation between them by the media and the public that has allowed them to perceive a greater threat than there is.

And simply because someone calls it an Am. Staff. doesn't mean it is. As we've all seen with our own dogs - people often mistake breeds - it doesn't make it fact.

I don't think I've EVER heard of a Staffordshire Bull Terrier being blamed in an attack. The reports of actual, registered, Am. Staff's I'm sure is also few and far between because the breed simply is NOT that popular.

The issue this time around is that the "problem" breed is not a recognized breed. When it was Dobermans, the parent club took steps to assure people that the breed was safe. When it was German Shepherds, they did the same. Rottweilers, well, we still have a long road ahead of us.

But they're purebreds. The generic "Pit Bull" is a non-recognized, non-purebred type of dog that has no known heritage. Because of that generic choice of people to have a known 'mutt' breeding that they cannot document or prove - has made the issue difficult.

However, there is no reason to EVER lump breeds together. A breed is a breed and should be counted as such. A mix is a mix, and should be counted as such. Period.

[fbkeays]

I have been arguing something similar with lumping all of the "bull" breeds together under one name, ie pit bull. It is like pooling all of the bit stats for retrievers- so all the bites from goldens, labs, flat coats, etc under one stat and saying, "Gee, look at how many bites they have, they must be very dangerous indeed", when you are talking about a dozen or so distinct breeds while seperating out the stats for all of the other purebred breeds indivually.
There are lies, damn lies and statistics as someone once said.

[alex221]

Trish, I know...and agree with everything you wrote. I just meant that the media and other's do 'lump'. Like it or not.

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by alex221

Trish, I know...and agree with everything you wrote. I just meant that the media and other's do 'lump'. Like it or not.

I vote NOT! So it is up to us and other responsible dog owners to educate them and to refuse to accept the statistics 'as is'. Unless we point it out and refuse it - silence is acceptance.

[spidey]

Saying that you can "lump" 2 recognized purebreds into one, along with an unrecognized breed is wrong.

I'll just point out that the UKC-recognized American Pit Bull Terrier is a very specific pure breed with a standard like any other purebred (note especially the disqualifications with regard to temperament), and has been recognized as a purebred by UKC (which has a rigorous recognition process comparable to AKC or CKC) for over 100 years. It's no less a purebred than any of the other various "pittie" breeds are. I attend UKC shows run by APBT clubs on a regular basis and I have a bit of a problem with implying that a breed which is not recognized by AKC or CKC, but which is recognized by UKC is somehow "unrecognized" (my own breed is CKC and UKC recognized, and currently in the Miscellaneous class in AKC, but the recent AKC progress in no way implies that the breed (which is hundreds of years old) was somehow any less of a pure breed simply because of a lack of AKC recognition, or wasn't a pure breed before it was CKC recognized). I'm just pointing this out because it's a pet peeve, and I very strongly agree with you that there is a HUGE problem with classifying all these different breeds under the same catchall "pit" term, not least because many mixed-breed dogs which have characteristic "pit" appearances could easily have NO "bully breed" in them at all, but rather have Boxer or Mastiff or any other breed, and lumping them in with "pit bulls" skews the statistics which are used to make important decisions and influence public opinion.

[MaddoxsMom]

[quote=sophie's-mom]If you haven't watched the video below the picture of the snarling mixed breed...do so. This man's opinion is easily taken as FACT, the way it is stated./QUOTE]

no no no...I was talking about his advice for dealing with an attacking dog...

He said first, don't run, then later he said "get away"...well most people i know would take his "get away" as a "run" especially if dealing with an attacking dog...

I wasnt referring to his take on mixed breeds...just that his advice was a little unclear as to what to do if being persued by an aggressive dog.

[sophie's-mom]

HEY!

Jusin cuz we's liv in JOJA don't mean we don't know nuthin!!



I was picking on the dueling banjos comment!!

[TrishB]

Originally Posted by spidey

I'll just point out that the UKC-recognized American Pit Bull Terrier is a very specific pure breed

Which I mentioned

So I'll reword - 3 recognized breeds across different registries, along with 'type' dogs of unknown heritage, should not be lumped together - it's wrong.

The only way it will stop is if we all stand up and tell them that we want ACCURATE reports, not these skewed numbers.

[MaddoxsMom]

Originally Posted by sophie's-mom

HEY!

Jusin cuz we's liv in JOJA don't mean we don't know nuthin!!



I was picking on the dueling banjos comment!!

After 4 years in the South, i know better than to pick on y'all (<--Get it?? hahahaa)...well, atleast not when your withing driving distance...lol