# Pitbull recently started attacking my other dog- HELP



## dcguthrie7 (May 18, 2015)

Long story short, I have had Delilah the pitbull on and off for 7 years (she was my ex's and my dog) and she has lived with me full-time the last 3 years. I got a chiweenie (Pumpkin) from the humane society three years ago, and they have never had issues until recently. 

Delilah wasn't socialized great as a puppy (thanks to my ex) and she is dog aggressive, always has been with strange dogs. She gets along with many dogs well, but I never know how she will react to meeting a new dog, I keep her leashed. It has become unbearable lately to walk her, because any yard we walk by with a dog she puts 100% of her energy towards dragging me to get to the dog. 

About a month and a half ago we brought a german shepherd husky puppy home, and this dog is very high energy and Delilah and the puppy play 24/7. Delilah loves the new puppy and seems very happy, she never plays with Pumpkin this much. I'm sure the new dog stresses her out though, because she jumps and is teething (I wonder if this stress is what's causing her outbursts- more to follow).

And a month ago, Delilah attacked Pumpkin unprovoked (no food or toys or anything involved). Pumpkin ended up going to the vet 2 days later, the vet thought his neck was broken. Turns out the neck wasn't broken, just very painful. I thought maybe this was a fluke, and something had been provoked that I missed. 

2 weeks ago, Delilah and Pumpkin were at my aunts house, and someone brought a daschund dog into the yard with them before I noticed (normally I would leash Delilah, and have the dogs meet out front before bringing the dog into the yard). Delilah sprinted to the dog, latched onto the neck and began shaking (exactly what happened to Pupmpkin a month ago). And two days ago, Delilah attacked Pumpkin again unprovoked, would not let go, blood was everywhere. She bit a hole in his tongue. I am separating them now most of the time. 

I love Delilah to death, and have cried over this decision. My ex has agreed to take her back, he has had many pitbulls and I am thinking she needs to be an only dog household. All the dogs she has attacked recently were small breeds.

I have always looked down on people for rehoming dogs instead of spending the time to train them. This is why I feel horrible. 

I know there are options such as training, but I am starting medical school in august and I don't have time or money to do intensive aggression training. I feel like a failure, I have failed Delilah and have failed to keep my other dogs safe. I am so thankful my ex is willing to take her, because I know a pitbull that has bit dogs would never be adopted. And she had skin tumors removed 6 months ago, I wonder if the chemicals may have anything to do with her recent behavior. She has always been dog aggressive, but never attacked like she has done recently. Any opinions/suggestions would be appreciated.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

dcguthrie7 said:


> 2 weeks ago, Delilah and Pumpkin were at my aunts house, and someone brought a daschund dog into the yard with them before I noticed (normally I would leash Delilah, and have the dogs meet out front before bringing the dog into the yard). Delilah sprinted to the dog, latched onto the neck and began shaking (exactly what happened to Pupmpkin a month ago). And two days ago, Delilah attacked Pumpkin again unprovoked, would not let go, blood was everywhere. She bit a hole in his tongue. I am separating them now most of the time.


You need to separate them 100% of the time. Frankly, you're lucky she hasn't killed one of the other dogs yet.

Don't feel bad about rehoming. Your only other option is to "crate and rotate," keeping her completely separated from other dogs. If that's not something you can do, she's better off in a home with no other dogs, and you know your ex will take good care of her; it's not like you're dumping her at the pound.


----------



## Canyx (Jul 1, 2011)

dcguthrie7 said:


> I am thinking she needs to be an only dog household.


Sounds logical.



dcguthrie7 said:


> I have always looked down on people for rehoming dogs instead of spending the time to train them. This is why I feel horrible. I know there are options such as training...


Don't be too hard on yourself. Yes, dogs can be trained to redirect, come to you instead of going toward another dog, stay in a specific space, etc... But you CAN'T train aggression out of a dog. This is not unusual for a pitbull to do, and a lot of bully households (not exclusively bully breeds though) never leave dogs alone together or unsupervised from day 1. That is, not let the first attack happen in the first place. Or people crate and rotate their dogs so that no dogs are ever out together at the same time and each gets a fair amount of attention. All this is to say, this incident, from what you've described, does not sound out of the ordinary for the breed. And it would probably be better for Delilah to live in an only dog household. It's a great thing that with your ex she already has a familiar person and home... Unless you are able to provide a fair crate-rotate lifestyle or keep the dogs separated at all times, you've done your best here.


----------



## dcguthrie7 (May 18, 2015)

Thanks guys I appreciate your thoughts.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Actually it sounds like the pitbull just formed a pack with the puppy. I would make sure all the dogs know the pack revolves around you and not let them play together until the puppy is old enough. A teething puppy is going to raise all sorts of questions about dominance and the older dog is going to get caught up in the flow of it. Before you give the dog away why not try reestablish your own dominance with training. Include Delilah in your puppy training. Let them see you training one another. And work on having Delilah sit when she sees another dog. Using treats.
A lazier option is to use a muzzle for a while.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

No. None of that. Dominance between dogs and humans is a load of bullcrap, and if the OP tries to assert dominance as a way of "fixing" this, the result WILL be dead dogs.

http://drsophiayin.com/philosophy/dominance?/dominance.php
http://www.clickersolutions.com/articles/2001/dominance.htm
https://paws4udogs.wordpress.com/2013/11/04/dominant-dogs/
https://apdt.com/pet-owners/choosing-a-trainer/dominance/


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

You don't believe dogs understand dominance?


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

Crantastic said:


> No. None of that. Dominance between dogs and humans is a load of bullcrap, and if the OP tries to assert dominance as a way of "fixing" this, the result WILL be dead dogs.


This x 1000!


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> You don't believe dogs understand dominance?


I don't believe that YOU understand dominance. It's not a personality trait. Read some of those links I posted.


----------



## d_ray (Nov 5, 2013)

Byakuzo said:


> Actually it sounds like the pitbull just formed a pack with the puppy. I would make sure all the dogs know the pack revolves around you and not let them play together until the puppy is old enough. A teething puppy is going to raise all sorts of questions about dominance and the older dog is going to get caught up in the flow of it. Before you give the dog away why not try reestablish your own dominance with training. Include Delilah in your puppy training. Let them see you training one another. And work on having Delilah sit when she sees another dog. Using treats.
> A lazier option is to use a muzzle for a while.


Please ignore this. 

Rehoming is probably the best option other than crate and rotate. You are doing the right thing and being responsible by rehoming. 

Bully breeds can often be dog aggressive and often do best as only dogs.

Don't beat yourself up.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

dcguthrie7 said:


> Long story short, I have had Delilah the pitbull on and off for 7 years (she was my ex's and my dog) and she has lived with me full-time the last 3 years. I got a chiweenie (Pumpkin) from the humane society three years ago, and *they have never had issues until recently. *
> 
> Delilah wasn't socialized great as a puppy (thanks to my ex) and she is dog aggressive, always has been with strange dogs. She gets along with many dogs well, but I never know how she will react to meeting a new dog, I keep her leashed. It has become unbearable lately to walk her, because any yard we walk by with a dog she puts 100% of her energy towards dragging me to get to the dog.
> 
> ...


 Do you see the bold everyone? Hm? 
This is EXACTLY what I was referring to.
OP- your dog is a pit bull. Bred to fight other dogs. It is natural and normal... crate and rotate is your only solution.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

That's horrible. You shouldn't make sweeping statements about any breed. Any dog can be aggressive and any dog can be taught not to be.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> That's horrible. You shouldn't make sweeping statements about any breed. Any dog can be aggressive and any dog can be taught not to be.


Untrue.

Stop giving bad advice. You could get someone's dogs killed.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Byakuzo said:


> That's horrible. You shouldn't make sweeping statements about any breed. Any dog can be aggressive and any dog can be taught not to be.


Not true at all.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Are you saying there has never be a well trained pitbull?


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

trek said:


> Do you see the bold everyone? Hm?
> This is EXACTLY what I was referring to.
> OP- your dog is a pit bull. Bred to fight other dogs. It is natural and normal... crate and rotate is your only solution.


Oh no....not this again. 

Yes, pit bulls are prone to dog selectivity and DA. Again, that does not mean *all* pit bulls should be kept isolated from other dogs.


----------



## d_ray (Nov 5, 2013)

Here we go.....


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

pawsaddict said:


> Oh no....not this again.
> 
> Yes, pit bulls are prone to dog selectivity and DA. Again, that does not mean *all* pit bulls should be kept isolated from other dogs.


Oh hell yes this again. 
Not all, but most. I wouldn't trust most people to supervise a bull/terrier type closely enough. ESPECIALLY not the general public.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

You can manage an aggressive dog; with a lot of training you can get it to focus on you around other dogs and basically ignore them, but you can never truly train aggression out of a dog. And with pits, dog (_not_ human) aggression is a breed trait. Not all pits will be dog aggressive, but the chances are higher because they've been bred that way for hundreds of years. I mean absolutely nothing against pit bulls when I say this; I think they'e great dogs. But you can't stick your head in the sand and ignore the fact that they have a higher tendency toward dog aggression any more than you can ignore how much bloodhounds like to sniff or border collies like to herd.

(And no, I'm not agreeing that all pits should be kept isolated from other dogs. My brother's pit was just fine with my dogs, and I also know other lovely pits. I'm saying that people should be aware of the possibility of their pits not being good with other dogs and should be prepared for that... and, in cases like the OP's, should take any aggression seriously.)


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

d_ray said:


> Here we go.....


Evidence to prove my theory right ^^ above you but still delusion is strong.... wow.



Crantastic said:


> You can manage an aggressive dog; with a lot of training you can get it to focus on you around other dogs and basically ignore them, but you can never truly train aggression out of a dog. And with pits, dog (_not_ human) aggression is a breed trait. Not all pits will be dog aggressive, but the chances are higher because they've been bred that way for hundreds of years. I mean absolutely nothing against pit bulls when I say this; I think they'e great dogs. But you can't stick your head in the sand and ignore the fact that they have a higher tendency toward dog aggression any more than you can ignore how much bloodhounds like to sniff or border collies like to herd.


Thank you.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Don't thank me yet; I'm not completely agreeing with you.  Added a bit to my above post.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

I


trek said:


> Oh hell yes this again.
> Not all, but most. I wouldn't trust most people to supervise a bull/terrier type closely enough. ESPECIALLY not the general public.





Crantastic said:


> Don't thank me yet; I'm not completely agreeing with you.  Added a bit to my above post.


 Above^^ 
We are speaking to the general public. Not a bunch of dog behaviourists/trainers/professional handlers. The GENERAL PUBLIC does not supervise well enough, they do not know what hints a dog gives that something is about to go down. Therefore, a blanket statement is the safest. But keep perpetuating that ideology.


----------



## d_ray (Nov 5, 2013)

trek said:


> Evidence to prove my theory right ^^ above you but still delusion is strong.... wow.
> 
> 
> Thank you.


Oh I agree that bully breeds are often prone to DA. But there are also some that do fine living with other dogs. 

My comment was directed towards the debate that I knew was coming not to anyone in particular.


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

trek said:


> Evidence to prove my theory right ^^ above you but still delusion is strong.... wow.


If you are so fired up about this, then maybe we should continue where we left off in the rant thread? I do recall people posting and you just....not responding. Until now. In a new thread. 

I agree with Crantastic. I am not sticking my head in the sand. But in the last thread, you were very adamant that pit bulls need to be kept isolated from other dogs, even if they are completely dog friendly. This dog is clearly selective. And was long before these incidents occurred.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

d_ray said:


> Oh I agree that bully breeds are often prone to DA. But there are also some that do fine living with other dogs.
> 
> My comment was directed towards the debate that I knew was coming not to anyone in particular.


 This dog was "fine" for three years.... and off an on for 4. A combination of 7 years. Where is the confusion here.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

It's morally wrong to isolate a dog for the rest of its life. Sending it away is just moving the problem to a different location. Train the dog and ignore anyone who tells you it can't be trained. They are dog racists! lol


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

pawsaddict said:


> If you are so fired up about this, then maybe we should continue where we left off in the rant thread? I do recall people posting and you just....not responding. Until now. In a new thread.
> 
> I agree with Crantastic. I am not sticking my head in the sand. But in the last thread, you were very adamant that pit bulls need to be kept isolated from other dogs, even if they are completely dog friendly. This dog is clearly selective. And was long before these incidents occurred.


 Yes. Because I comprehend the the demographic that reads this forum.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Byakuzo said:


> It's morally wrong to isolate a dog for the rest of its life. Sending it away is just moving the problem to a different location. Train the dog and ignore anyone who tells you it can't be trained. They are dog racists! lol


This is who reads this forum.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I've been here for five years. Thankfully, that kind of poster is rarer and rarer here nowadays.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

My point is- better safe then sorry. The GP reads this forum and people that have the same belief system as Byakuzo. That is why I say no bull/terriers shouldn't be around other dogs. Safe.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

So someone comes to the forum and asks for help with their pitbull that has recently started attacking their other dog and the senior members tell them to give up on the dog... what kind of place is this?


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

trek said:


> My point is- better safe then sorry. The GP reads this forum and people that have the same belief system as Byakuzo. That is why I say no bull/terriers shouldn't be around other dogs. Safe.


It's not really feasible, though. Sure, I agree that bully breeds are not good dog park or dog daycare candidates -- not only because of the higher propensity for dog aggression, but because if an incident does occur, even if a bully breed doesn't start it, they'll be blamed -- but it's very difficult to keep a dog isolated from all other dogs, and it's overkill in most situations. I don't think people should wait until a dog has attacked three times, as the OP's dog has, but people just need to learn to take the earlier incidents much more seriously.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> So someone comes to the forum and asks for help with their pitbull that has recently started attacking their other dog and the senior members tell them to give up on the dog... what kind of place is this?


It's a place where we don't want to give advice that has a high chance of getting someone's dog killed. If you really cared about dogs, you'd understand that.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Byakuzo said:


> So someone comes to the forum and asks for help with their pitbull that has recently started attacking their other dog and the senior members tell them to give up on the dog... what kind of place is this?


Do you understand crate and rotate? 
Do you expect a collie to herd?
Do you expect a terrier to kill rodents?
Do you expect a hound to follow their nose? 
Do you expect a sight hound to chase small quarry?
Why do you not expect a fighting breed to fight?


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> It's not really feasible, though. Sure, I agree that bully breeds are not good dog park or dog daycare candidates -- not only because of the higher propensity for dog aggression, but because if an incident does occur, even if a bully breed doesn't start it, they'll be blamed -- but it's very difficult to keep a dog isolated from all other dogs, and it's overkill in most situations. I don't think people should wait until a dog has attacked three times, as the OP's dog has, but people just need to learn to take the earlier incidents much more seriously.


It's not difficult at all and it is very feasible. A good pit bull owner is an above par dog owner.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

I expect all dogs to be ABLE to do all of those things, some better than others, I expect to be able to stop my dog from doing anyone of those things if the situation requires it.
I do like who you phrased it though. I disagree with it still.
And yes i understand crate and rotate but believe there are other options.


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

Crantastic said:


> It's not really feasible, though. Sure, I agree that bully breeds are not good dog park or dog daycare candidates -- not only because of the higher propensity for dog aggression, but because if an incident does occur, even if a bully breed doesn't start it, they'll be blamed -- but it's very difficult to keep a dog isolated from all other dogs, and it's overkill in most situations. I don't think people should wait until a dog has attacked three times, as the OP's dog has, but people just need to learn to take the earlier incidents much more seriously.


Very well said, Crantastic.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

sending the dog away without FIXING THE PROBLEM will result in more dogs getting hurt... think about it the problem dog will still be out there.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Byakuzo said:


> I expect all dogs to be ABLE to do all of those things, some better than others, I expect to be able to stop my dog from doing anyone of those things if the situation requires it.
> I do like who you phrased it though. I disagree with it still.
> And yes i understand crate and rotate but believe there are other options.


 Are you a fan of Cesar Milan?


----------



## dcguthrie7 (May 18, 2015)

Don't worry, I never believed it was a dominance issue. This has been going on far longer than since the puppy came into the picture, and 2 weeks ago she attacked a dog outside of our home, nothing to do with the pack.


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

trek said:


> It's not difficult at all and it is very feasible. A good pit bull owner is an above par dog owner.


Here is where I get confused: You say that you are only saying that pit bulls need to be kept isolated from other dogs so that the general public can easily follow and understand. But...you also keep your dog separated from other dogs; although, from my understanding, your dog is not DA or selective. Are you not more educated than the average dog owner? Or do you really just believe that all pit bulls need to be isolated from other dogs?


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Byakuzo said:


> sending the dog away without FIXING THE PROBLEM will result in more dogs getting hurt... think about it the problem dog will still be out there.


I agree with you there but I'm going to come off as extremely harsh. 
First I would see a vet for health problems, some pain can make animals ornery and act out of character. She should have a full blood work up done, a senior panel as she is an older girl. 

IF you can't crate and rotate, I would euthanize. There is a very LOW chance that anyone would want to adopt a senior pit bull type... very low chance. They are consistently euthanized as healthy young dogs, an old DA pit bull would have a snowball's chance in hell. 
Sometimes, there are things worse then death. If you can't be committed to a stringent crate and rotate scenario, then I would be merciful.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

pawsaddict said:


> Here is where I get confused: You say that you are only saying that pit bulls need to be kept isolated from other dogs so that the general public can easily follow and understand. But...you also keep your dog separated from other dogs; although, from my understanding, your dog is not DA or selective. Are you not more educated than the average dog owner? Or do you really just believe that all pit bulls need to be isolated from other dogs?



There are a select few dogs mine socializes with under my STRICT supervision. Two pomeranians (mother and daughter), a border collie, a bassett hound mix and a severely obese lab. She is reactive/selective.
If she became all out DA, I would have zero issues keeping her away from dogs. I expect that one day it might happen.


----------



## dcguthrie7 (May 18, 2015)

trek said:


> This dog was "fine" for three years.... and off an on for 4. A combination of 7 years. Where is the confusion here.


"Long story short, I have had Delilah the pitbull on and off for 7 years (she was my ex's and my dog) and she has lived with me full-time the last 3 years. I got a chiweenie (Pumpkin) from the humane society three years ago, and they have never had issues until recently." - from my original post

Not sure where your confusion is, I think it's pretty clear. Off and on living with me, for 7 years. The off sections referred to times she lived with my ex and his parents. When I say she was fine for 3 years, I am referring to the relationship between her and my other dog. They lived together for 3 years, and there have never been issues between the two dogs until recently.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

dcguthrie7 said:


> "Long story short, I have had Delilah the pitbull on and off for 7 years (she was my ex's and my dog) and she has lived with me full-time the last 3 years. I got a chiweenie (Pumpkin) from the humane society three years ago, and they have never had issues until recently." - from my original post
> 
> Not sure where your confusion is, I think it's pretty clear. Off and on living with me, for 7 years. The off sections referred to times she lived with my ex and his parents. When I say she was fine for 3 years, I am referring to the relationship between her and my other dog. They lived together for 3 years, and there have never been issues between the two dogs until recently.


 Where are we disagreeing? 

First, I would get a vet work up done. A full senior blood panel. I would target the thyroid. 

I would also say that if you can't crate and rotate, you must euthanize. There is .01 chance that anyone would want a senior severely DA pit bull type. 

Good luck to you.


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

trek said:


> There are a select few dogs mine socializes with under my STRICT supervision. Two pomeranians, a border collie, a bassett hound mix and a severely obese lab. She is reactive/selective.


Thank you for clarifying. That helps me to understand I little bit better. I get where you are coming from that it is easier to keep everyone safe by using blanket statements such as "pit bulls should be kept away separate from other dogs". I do think we need to give the general public (people just Googling) a little bit more credit and take the opportunity we have here to educate the public one all of the responsible ways to own a pit bull, including the possibility of 100% separation and the like.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

You might want to take her in for a vet checkup to make sure that her recent change in behavior isn't due to any sort of medical issue. It's likely behavioral, though, possibly the stress of adding a new dog to the household (even if she likes the dog, it changes the routine), possibly just a result of her getting older and less tolerant.

I think you're making the right decision in sending her to live with your ex. You are not dumping her at a pound; you are not handing her off to someone who's unaware of or unprepared for her issues. Your ex knows what to expect and can keep her away from other dogs. Sometimes rehoming is the best option.


----------



## dcguthrie7 (May 18, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> It's not really feasible, though. Sure, I agree that bully breeds are not good dog park or dog daycare candidates -- not only because of the higher propensity for dog aggression, but because if an incident does occur, even if a bully breed doesn't start it, they'll be blamed -- but it's very difficult to keep a dog isolated from all other dogs, and it's overkill in most situations. I don't think people should wait until a dog has attacked three times, as the OP's dog has, but people just need to learn to take the earlier incidents much more seriously.


I have had this dog 7 years with 0 attacks, each attack ended less than 5 seconds from the beginning. It has taken me a month since the first attack to decide she needs to go (which after bonding with a dog for 7 years- I feel is hasty and quick), I would hardly call that waiting. I don't appreciate the insinuation that I am irresponsible for waiting so long. I separate my dogs unless I am right next to them, which is why the attacks got stopped immediately. I had hoped the first attack was some kind of fluke and some instigation that I missed, obviously the second attack on my dog made me realize it was a pattern. Not everyone has experience with aggressive dogs and I think I have handled the situation just fine with the resources I have, so thanks.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

trek said:


> I would also say that if you can't crate and rotate, you must euthanize. There is .01 chance that anyone would want a senior severely DA pit bull type.
> 
> Good luck to you.


The dog is going to live full-time with the ex, who will keep her away from other dogs. No euth necessary here.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> The dog is going to live full-time with the ex, who will keep her away from other dogs. No euth necessary here.


 Ah I see... missed that part. 
Hopefully, he is fully aware of his dog's history.


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

Crantastic said:


> You might want to take her in for a vet checkup to make sure that her recent change in behavior isn't due to any sort of medical issue. It's likely behavioral, though, possibly the stress of adding a new dog to the household (even if she likes the dog, it changes the routine), possibly just a result of her getting older and less tolerant.
> 
> I think you're making the right decision in sending her to live with your ex. You are not dumping her at a pound; you are not handing her off to someone who's unaware of or unprepared for her issues. Your ex knows what to expect and can keep her away from other dogs. Sometimes rehoming is the best option.


Agreed. If your ex can keep her separated from other dogs at all times and is committed to having her be the only dog in the household, I think re-homing her to him is a great option. Also agree that a vet check with a full blood panel (including thyroid) would be a very good idea.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

dcguthrie7 said:


> I have had this dog 7 years with 0 attacks, each attack ended less than 5 seconds from the beginning. It has taken me a month since the first attack to decide she needs to go (which after bonding with a dog for 7 years- I feel is hasty and quick), I would hardly call that waiting. I don't appreciate the insinuation that I am irresponsible for waiting so long. I separate my dogs unless I am right next to them, which is why the attacks got stopped immediately. I had hoped the first attack was some kind of fluke and some instigation that I missed, obviously the second attack on my dog made me realize it was a pattern. Not everyone has experience with aggressive dogs and I think I have handled the situation just fine with the resources I have, so thanks.


She/he was talking to me, not you. 
And honestly... seconds is all it takes.


----------



## dcguthrie7 (May 18, 2015)

trek said:


> I agree with you there but I'm going to come off as extremely harsh.
> First I would see a vet for health problems, some pain can make animals ornery and act out of character. She should have a full blood work up done, a senior panel as she is an older girl.
> 
> IF you can't crate and rotate, I would euthanize. There is a very LOW chance that anyone would want to adopt a senior pit bull type... very low chance. They are consistently euthanized as healthy young dogs, an old DA pit bull would have a snowball's chance in hell.
> Sometimes, there are things worse then death. If you can't be committed to a stringent crate and rotate scenario, then I would be merciful.


Also I am not "sending the dog away". I seeked out my ex, her previous owner for this particular reason. He has more experience with pitbulls than I do, and the first thing I did was called my vet and my ex will be taking her in for a workup- although we already know it's most likely the cancer. I have said previously, I was accepted to medical school which requires intense hours and do not have the means and time to do training to deal with this issue. But I am passing her onto somebody who can. I would not rehome her on craigslist and expect some stranger to be able to handle her, when I, her owner who loves her to death can't even deal with it.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

pawsaddict said:


> Thank you for clarifying. That helps me to understand I little bit better. I get where you are coming from that it is easier to keep everyone safe by using blanket statements such as "pit bulls should be kept away separate from other dogs". I do think we need to give the general public (people just Googling) a little bit more credit and take the opportunity we have here to educate the public one all of the responsible ways to own a pit bull, including the possibility of 100% separation and the like.



There are so many idiots in this world, I refuse to give anyone credit.... not at the expense of this breed.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

dcguthrie7 said:


> Also I am not "sending the dog away". I seeked out my ex, her previous owner for this particular reason. He has more experience with pitbulls than I do, and the first thing I did was called my vet and my ex will be taking her in for a workup- although we already know it's most likely the cancer. I have said previously, I was accepted to medical school which requires intense hours and do not have the means and time to do training to deal with this issue. But I am passing her onto somebody who can. I would not rehome her on craigslist and expect some stranger to be able to handle her, when I, her owner who loves her to death can't even deal with it.


Good on you. Sounds like you have a plan in place. 
Until the dog goes back to your ex, I'm sure you understand that she should be kept away from ALL dogs at ALL times. Always leash when walking and keep her tied or in a fence she can't escape to go potty. Always supervise.


----------



## dcguthrie7 (May 18, 2015)

trek said:


> She/he was talking to me, not you.
> And honestly... seconds is all it takes.


I quoted and responded due to the comment of me waiting for 3 attacks to do something about it- so yes I am allowed to respond if that's ok with you. 

And yes I realize seconds is all it takes- that's why she's going. Maybe you should read the entire initial post before adding your comments. I already feel like crap that it happened and realized it was a mistake, I am making the right decision to rehome her to an owner who IS AWARE of her past since he WAS HER INITIAL OWNER (stated in original post) and IS AWARE she can't be around other dogs and is DA. Berating me and telling me things I already know is not going to make a difference in this situation as I have obviously learned from this situation and am getting rid of her.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

dcguthrie7 said:


> I quoted and responded due to the comment of me waiting for 3 attacks to do something about it- so yes I am allowed to respond if that's ok with you.
> 
> And yes I realize seconds is all it takes- that's why she's going. Maybe you should read the entire initial post before adding your comments. I already feel like crap that it happened and realized it was a mistake, I am making the right decision to rehome her to an owner who IS AWARE of her past since he WAS HER INITIAL OWNER (stated in original post) and IS AWARE she can't be around other dogs and is DA. Berating me and telling me things I already know is not going to make a difference in this situation as I have obviously learned from this situation and am getting rid of her.


 I don't really understand why you are combative but perhaps it's the terse/blunt sound of my posts. 
As I already said: good luck to you, you're doing the right thing for all involved.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Not a fan but have seen a video where he gets bitten by a labrador.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> I don't believe that YOU understand dominance. It's not a personality trait. Read some of those links I posted.


The problem with these articles is they draw a box around multiple ideas and give them a name (dominance) then prove one of the ideas to be flawed and then think that disproves all of it. When i say dominance i don't mean humans hurting and scaring small dogs to feel powerful. I mean training your dog to be able to follow you in a situation where it needs to. Dogs can't be allowed to do whatever they want or they will fight and chew your furniture and poop inside. so you train your dog not to do these things and in doing so you are being dominant. If the dog was being dominant it would not be listening to you. Simple. If you train a dog then you are dominant. If a dog trains you it is dominant.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Pit Bulls are PRONE to issues with DA. That's not what they are as a whole though. DA is a behavioral issue, not a natural behavior. A lot of other dog breeds are prone to it more than others too. Pit Bull owners should be aware of this possibility and take precautions when allowing their Pit Bulls around other dogs, but its a huge load to say all Pit Bulls need to be kept away from other dogs because they will snap and kill other dogs, period. There are tons of dog friendly Pit Bulls out there who get along with others beautifully through out the entirety of their lives.


----------



## Sighty (Mar 16, 2014)

Byakuzo said:


> The problem with these articles is they draw a box around multiple ideas and give them a name (dominance) then prove one of the ideas to be flawed and then think that disproves all of it. When i say dominance i don't mean humans hurting and scaring small dogs to feel powerful. I mean training your dog to be able to follow you in a situation where it needs to. Dogs can't be allowed to do whatever they want or they will fight and chew your furniture and poop inside. so you train your dog not to do these things and in doing so you are being dominant. If the dog was being dominant it would not be listening to you. Simple. If you train a dog then you are dominant. If a dog trains you it is dominant.


How do a dog train a human? Chewing furniture is dominance? Pooping indoors is dominance? I have always treated my dogs with respect and compassion. When we train, the dog learn by playing and having fun. My dog listens to me because it gets something positive out of it.

Dominance between dogs exists, yes. Dominance between human and dog? No. The dog knows that a human is not a dog.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> The problem with these articles is they draw a box around multiple ideas and give them a name (dominance) then prove one of the ideas to be flawed and then think that disproves all of it. When i say dominance i don't mean humans hurting and scaring small dogs to feel powerful. I mean training your dog to be able to follow you in a situation where it needs to. Dogs can't be allowed to do whatever they want or they will fight and chew your furniture and poop inside. so you train your dog not to do these things and in doing so you are being dominant. If the dog was being dominant it would not be listening to you. Simple. If you train a dog then you are dominant. If a dog trains you it is dominant.


No. That's being a good leader and training your dog. Being a good leader and training your dog is different from being dominant.


----------



## Eenypup (Mar 21, 2014)

Yeah. I mean, we aren't talking about a game bred APBT here (unless I'm mistaken, in which case you're blessed this is all that's happened so far ). Bully mutts from the average BYB or animal shelter are a far cry from a well bred APBT. I would still advise caution with other dogs, especially as the dog leaves puppyhood and matures, and never recommend a bully mix go to a dog park or similar gathering of strange dogs.

But to say a dog that is labelled as a "pit bull" by the average joe is extraordinarily likely to be very DA? I don't buy it. It's like getting a random black & white dog from the shelter, thinking it kinda looks like a border collie, and saying you're 10000% positive this dog's gonna herd! But because it's likely not a BC & just looks like one, or may be a BC mix of some kind? May very well not have a strong herding gene in it's blood. Is it more likely than the dog that looks like a chihuahua mix to herd? Yes! Will it definitely? Nope.

Of course I think OP is doing the right thing. This dog for whatever reason is not getting along with other dogs and is a danger to your smaller dog. Rehoming to your ex & getting a vet check-up is the only safe option. Kudos, you're doing a great job.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> No. That's being a good leader and training your dog. Being a good leader and training your dog is different from being dominant.


Nope. That is literally what dominance means. dominant = leader.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> Nope. That is literally what dominance means. dominant = leader.


No. Please educate yourself. If you didn't like any of my other links, try these.

The Concept Formerly Described as "Dominance"
The “D word” and Social Relationships in Dogs
Dogs & “Dominance” –What’s a Person to Do?
Dog Training and the “D” Word



> First of all, it would be good to start with a definition. The simple definition of ‘dominance,’ as the term is used by the general public is something like: “control or command over others.” However, (and this is a huge “however”) that is NOT the definition as the term is used by people who study animal behavior, the ones who first coined the term to describe a certain kind of social relationship in non-human animals. In ethological terms, “dominance” refers to “priority access to a preferred, limited resource“. In other words, if there’s only one really great table open at a restaurant, who is going to get it? You, or the famous actress standing beside you?





> I’ll start with the bottom line. I don’t use the word “dominance” when talking to people about training their dogs. There’s just no profit in it. Even given that dominance is about “priority access” and “social freedom,” but not about how to get it, I still see nothing but the potential for confusion and misuse. Given that in general parlance dominance means “total control,” and that it is so often it is equated with force (completely inappropriately), I avoid the term as if it were toxic. Which is exactly what I think it can be in this context.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Sighty said:


> How do a dog train a human? Chewing furniture is dominance? Pooping indoors is dominance? I have always treated my dogs with respect and compassion. When we train, the dog learn by playing and having fun. My dog listens to me because it gets something positive out of it.
> 
> Dominance between dogs exists, yes. Dominance between human and dog? No. The dog knows that a human is not a dog.


A dog trains a human the same way a human trains a dog. repetition.
chewing furniture is not dominance pooping indoors is not dominance. however if your dog understands that you don't want it to poop indoors and therefor chooses not to that means you are dominant. The dog is doing something it wouldn't naturally do because you told it to. dominance.
Correct the dog knows the human is not a dog... human is still a being with its own willpower that will occasionally want the dog to do something the dog doesn't want to do. if the dog wants to kill a cat and the human doesn't want the dog to kill a cat there is an impasse. the cat can't both live and die. human and dog cannot both have their own way. the dominant will be followed. dominance is the goal. training and treats is the means to it.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Added some links to my above post. You are completely wrong about what dominance is, and you are giving a lot of bad advice on this thread. I'm glad the OP is ignoring it.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> No. Please educate yourself. If you didn't like any of my other links, try these.
> 
> The Concept Formerly Described as "Dominance"
> The “D word” and Social Relationships in Dogs
> ...



Once again you have a posted a list of articles that build upon incorrect suppositions. The idea of trying to stop using a word because it has negative intonations is proven to be ineffective. Instead you have to allow the meaning to be fleshed out and further understood. These articles are just repeating the same debating tricks. try to consider my argument without bias.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I am. Your argument is ridiculous. You're trying to give a new definition to a word that already has an ethological definition AND a commonly-used (incorrect) training definition. I've had this same argument with people before. It doesn't matter what _you_ think dominance means, because when you use it here, you're either going to get people like me who explain why you're using it wrong from an ethological perspective, or you're going to get people who assume you mean "alpha" kind of stuff, using force to make a dog behave. The word is poisoned in dog training. Replace it with "benevolent leadership" or "proper training" or something, because that's what you mean.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> however if your dog understands that you don't want it to poop indoors and therefor chooses not to that means you are dominant. The dog is doing something it wouldn't naturally do because you told it to. dominance.


Nooooooooo. The dog is doing something which has a track record of being rewarding (pooping outdoors). 


Regardless of the tired argument about Pit Bulls as a whole, THIS pit bull is DA and needs to be in a home without other dogs (or crate/rotated). That's not "not fixing a problem," it's not a problem and it can't be fixed because it's a feature, not a bug. It just has to be managed and it has nothing to do with dominance or leadership or training or anything but the dog's inherent traits.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> I am. Your argument is ridiculous. You're trying to give a new definition to a word that already has an ethological definition AND a commonly-used (incorrect) training definition. I've had this same argument with people before. It doesn't matter what _you_ think dominance means, because when you use it here, you're either going to get people like me who explain why you're using it wrong from an ethological perspective, or you're going to get people who assume you mean "alpha" kind of stuff, using force to make a dog behave. The word is poisoned in dog training. Replace it with "benevolent leadership" or "proper training" or something, because that's what you mean.


no i am trying to EXPLAIN the actual meaning to a word that has been around since before elitist dog trainers started to trying to create a consumer market out of training techniques lol. The fact is dominance is a part of dog behaviour and therefor can't be completely forgotten about or covered up. First time dog owners are still going to think their dog is challenging them when they go through certain puppy stages and will want to be dominant. So those who have more knowledge or more experience in trial and error shouldn't just come up with ridiculous 5 minute phrases to bandy about but just admit the truth... hahahaha benevolent leadership... amazing. If your dog doesn't do what you tell it to do then you are not dominant.The answer... train it. If everyone did that and stopped creating camps and slur campaigns there wouldn't be a problem.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Nooooooooo. The dog is doing something which has a track record of being rewarding (pooping outdoors).
> 
> 
> Regardless of the tired argument about Pit Bulls as a whole, THIS pit bull is DA and needs to be in a home without other dogs. That's not "not fixing a problem," it's not a problem and it can't be fixed because it's a feature, not a bug. It just has to be managed.



the reward is the means to an end. If I tell my dog to go to his bed he will go. This is dominance. The way i achieved dominance is Training. The way i trained is Treats. You teach the dog to understand what you want, It does it because you are dominant.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

No, my dogs do stuff that gets them what they want - treats, toys, attention. 

I assure you, Squash does not attention bark because I am dominant. He attention barks because it gets him attention.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> no i am trying to EXPLAIN the actual meaning to a word that has been around since before elitist dog trainers started to trying to create a consumer market out of training techniques lol.


No, you're not. You're spouting nonsense that proves you haven't actually read any of the writing from the "elitist dog trainers" that you're trying to demean. If you're going to argue against something, at least understand what the opposing side is saying first.

Dogs do things that get them what they want. If a dog jumps on people and gets attention, the dog will keep doing that. If a dog jumps on people and gets ignored, and then gets treats for sitting instead, the dog will do that. It's simple, and it has nothing to do with dominance.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Nooooooooo. The dog is doing something which has a track record of being rewarding (pooping outdoors).
> 
> 
> Regardless of the tired argument about Pit Bulls as a whole, THIS pit bull is DA and needs to be in a home without other dogs (or crate/rotated). That's not "not fixing a problem," it's not a problem and it can't be fixed because it's a feature, not a bug. It just has to be managed and it has nothing to do with dominance or leadership or training or anything but the dog's inherent traits.



Has your dog ever looked at you in a way that lets you know its done something you don't want it to do but its sorry?


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> No, you're not. You're spouting nonsense that proves you haven't actually read any of the writing from the "elitist dog trainers" that you're trying to demean. If you're going to argue against something, at least understand what the opposing side is saying first.
> 
> Dogs do things that get them what they want. If a dog jumps on people and gets attention, the dog will keep doing that. If a dog jumps on people and gets ignored, and then gets treats for sitting instead, the dog will do that. It's simple, and it has nothing to do with dominance.


 Yes i agree but that is training. once the dog understands what is good and what is bad it can still repeat a bad behaviour though. you are achieving dominance though training but you are unaware of this because you have read that dominance is a bad thing. if you were to call your dog and encourage it to jump up at you would it do it?


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> Has your dog ever looked at you in a way that lets you know its done something you don't want it to do but its sorry?


Nope. I've seen appeasement behaviors from my dogs, though.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> Yes i agree but that is training. once the dog understands what is good and what is bad it can still repeat a bad behaviour though. you are achieving dominance though training but you are unaware of this because you have read that dominance is a bad thing. if you were to call your dog and encourage it to jump up at you would it do it?


Yes, my dog knows a "paws up" command. She won't jump on me unless I ask her to.

You don't achieve dominance through training, not in the ethological definition and not in the dictionary definition. You achieve a good relationship with your dog; you achieve a well-trained dog. You don't achieve dominance.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

I


RCloud said:


> Pit Bulls are PRONE to issues with DA. That's not what they are as a whole though. DA is a behavioral issue, not a natural behavior. A lot of other dog breeds are prone to it more than others too. Pit Bull owners should be aware of this possibility and take precautions when allowing their Pit Bulls around other dogs, but its a huge load to say all Pit Bulls need to be kept away from other dogs because they will snap and kill other dogs, period. There are tons of dog friendly Pit Bulls out there who get along with others beautifully through out the entirety of their lives.


No. They were bred for DA. That was the whole purpose behind their breed development. 
As for how "natural" it is.... um, what? Dogs aren't natural. Essentially, they are retarded wolves that are bred to our liking... APBT's were bred for pit fighting. End.


Eenypup said:


> Yeah. I mean, we aren't talking about a game bred APBT here (unless I'm mistaken, in which case you're blessed this is all that's happened so far ). Bully mutts from the average BYB or animal shelter are a far cry from a well bred APBT. I would still advise caution with other dogs, especially as the dog leaves puppyhood and matures, and never recommend a bully mix go to a dog park or similar gathering of strange dogs.
> 
> But to say a dog that is labelled as a "pit bull" by the average joe is extraordinarily likely to be very DA? I don't buy it. It's like getting a random black & white dog from the shelter, thinking it kinda looks like a border collie, and saying you're 10000% positive this dog's gonna herd! But because it's likely not a BC & just looks like one, or may be a BC mix of some kind? May very well not have a strong herding gene in it's blood. Is it more likely than the dog that looks like a chihuahua mix to herd? Yes! Will it definitely? Nope.
> 
> Of course I think OP is doing the right thing. This dog for whatever reason is not getting along with other dogs and is a danger to your smaller dog. Rehoming to your ex & getting a vet check-up is the only safe option. Kudos, you're doing a great job.


 Game bred means tested in the pit. I'm certain that most APBT's or bull/terriers aren't game bred in the States/Canada anymore. 

It isn't only "game bred" bull/terriers that are off the rails DA. I've met many shelter dogs that would rip up their metal crate to kill the next door dog.


----------



## dcguthrie7 (May 18, 2015)

Thanks for the input everyone, I guess I mostly seeked this forum to make sure I'm not a horrible person for it. I will cry my eyes out tomorrow when she goes, she was an amazing loving dog, minus this factor.

Any time I get an animal I do lots and lots of research, breed specific, training, etc. (I work in a research lab, research is my forte). We have done AKC "shy dog" classes as well as lots of other training, she is well trained, listens great, and has been an unbelievable dog minus the DA. I had always assumed her dog aggression was from my ex not properly socializing her as a puppy - which can obviously make any dog have behavioral issues. But after all the training we have done to work on it- lots of refocusing and attention training- I do believe this is a trait and can't be "cured" but only managed.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

dcguthrie7 said:


> Thanks for the input everyone, I guess I mostly seeked this forum to make sure I'm not a horrible person for it. I will cry my eyes out tomorrow when she goes, she was an amazing loving dog, minus this factor.
> 
> Any time I get an animal I do lots and lots of research, breed specific, training, etc. (I work in a research lab, research is my forte). We have done AKC "shy dog" classes as well as lots of other training, she is well trained, listens great, and has been an unbelievable dog minus the DA. I had always assumed her dog aggression was from my ex not properly socializing her as a puppy - which can obviously make any dog have behavioral issues. But after all the training we have done to work on it- lots of refocusing and attention training- I do believe this is a trait and can't be "cured" but only managed.


 It is a trait and there is nothing you could have done to prevent it. 
I'm glad it was a learning experience


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> Yes, my dog knows a "paws up" command. She won't jump on me unless I ask her to.
> 
> You don't achieve dominance through training, not in the ethological definition and not in the dictionary definition. You achieve a good relationship with your dog; you achieve a well-trained dog. You don't achieve dominance.


So really all we are arguing is the use of the word dominance. dominance - power and influence over others. Treats, attention, walks, play these are your powers. Sit, stay, paws up, come these are your influences over your dogs behaviours. 
What was the word you would have me use?... XD


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Nope. I've seen appeasement behaviors from my dogs, though.


So you mean yes?


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> So really all we are arguing is the use of the word dominance. dominance - power and influence over others. Treats, attention, walks, play these are your powers. Sit, stay, paws up, come these are your influences over your dogs behaviours.
> What was the word you would have me use?... XD


Yes, we are arguing about your misuse of the word dominance. That's been clear for a few pages now.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> Yes, we are arguing about your misuse of the word dominance. That's been clear for a few pages now.


But surely you would have looked up the definition for the word dominance by now?
Here ill help you
https://www.google.co.uk/search?cli...&oe=UTF-8&gfe_rd=cr&ei=5XBaVZqmEvOq8weZyYDYCA


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Dominance (dictionary)-

power and influence over others.

"the worldwide dominance of Hollywood"
synonyms:	supremacy, superiority, ascendancy, preeminence, predominance, domination, dominion, mastery, power, authority, rule, command, control, sway; literarypuissance
"a position of political dominance"

Yes. We are dominant over our dogs.

Dominance (Cesar Millan)-

Use physical aversives when dog doesn't obey verbal cues.

A lot of people don't use this method, although I do personally use positive punishment when necessary.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> So you mean yes?


No, I mean no. I have a feeling we're about to veer off into "do dogs feel guilty" territory so I'll just say up front - no, they do not. Their appeasement behaviors when they feel uncomfortable because we are acting scary look a lot like guilt, but they do not feel guilt.

As a rebuttal to the inevitable anecdotes, let me tell you a story told to me by a behaviorist. This behaviorist had a client with a dog and a behavior problem they were working on. As a totally unrelated aside, the dog occasionally pooped in the house and the people insisted that the dog "knew it was wrong" because it always looked "sorry/guilty" when the owners came home and he had done so. It didn't matter what the behaviorist said to convince them otherwise. 

Years later, long after the original problem had been addressed and they had stopped seeing her, they called her out of the blue to tell her she had been right. They had recently gotten a new puppy. Whenever the puppy pooped in the house (easily distinguishable by their relative sizes)(also apparently these people weren't good at housetraining) the adult dog looked "guilty." Not the puppy, the adult dog.

Why? Because poop + owner = angry looks and words. So the dog, rather than feeling guilty, was trying to diffuse them by offering appeasement behaviors. The same reason Maisy throws off appeasement behaviors like crazy when I mutter under my breath at my laptop acting up. She doesn't feel guilty about it, my tone makes her uncomfortable and she's asking me to chill out.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

There is a lot of 'it's not the dog, it's the owner always!' going around and while yes, many behavior issues are directly because of the owner not training, not providing exercise, etc dogs do have inherent temperaments and drives. Things like dog aggression, shyness, reactivity, etc can be out of the owner's control. Then it comes to management. 


I think you are doing the best thing for all your dogs by rehoming her to your ex. It really sounds like she needs to be an only dog and that's ok. Don't feel like a failure.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

trek said:


> Dominance (dictionary)
> power and influence over others.
> 
> "the worldwide dominance of Hollywood"
> ...


Exactly dominance achieved without violence and fear.


----------



## Laurelin (Nov 2, 2006)

I am not really sure why calling it dominance or leadership really matters? 

Being 'dominant' over a dog aggressive dog isn't going to make the dog aggression go away?


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Byakuzo said:


> Exactly dominance achieved without violence and fear.


I use physical aversives at times.
I don't feel morally reprehensible.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

sassafras said:


> No, I mean no. I have a feeling we're about to veer off into "do dogs feel guilty" territory so I'll just say up front - no, they do not. Their appeasement behaviors when they feel uncomfortable because we are acting scary look a lot like guilt, but they do not feel guilt.
> 
> As a rebuttal to the inevitable anecdotes, let me tell you a story told to me by a behaviorist. This behaviorist had a client with a dog and a behavior problem they were working on. As a totally unrelated aside, the dog occasionally pooped in the house and the people insisted that the dog "knew it was wrong" because it always looked "sorry/guilty" when the owners came home and he had done so. It didn't matter what the behaviorist said to convince them otherwise.
> 
> ...



The puppy didn't look guilty because it hadn't learned that poop inside is bad thing. If the adult dog had pooped inside while looking at the owners without showing 'appeasement behaviours' then you would have an adult dog that either didn't understand it was a bad thing or an adult dog that did understand but didn't care and therefor did not have a dominant owner. If dominance did not exist a dog would never do anything that you didn't offer a reward for. Sometimes your puppy will look at you and ignore a command you have given a 1000 times maybe bark and hop a bit this is your dog choosing not to obey. puppies are testing your resolve. this comes from a growing understanding of dominance.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

trek said:


> I use physical aversives at times.
> I don't feel morally reprehensible.



well from my experience violence isn't necessary. My patience and will suffice when treats and fun don't immediately work.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Laurelin said:


> I am not really sure why calling it dominance or leadership really matters?
> 
> Being 'dominant' over a dog aggressive dog isn't going to make the dog aggression go away?



A dog can't be aggressive if its busy listening to you. If you are dominant then your dog will follow you not try and lead you into a fight. Sure some dogs might be ready for violence sooner than others but so can some humans... mike tyson writes poems now.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Byakuzo said:


> well from my experience violence isn't necessary. My patience and will suffice when treats and fun don't immediately work.


 Well, that's your opinion and you have the right to it.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

trek said:


> Well, that's your opinion and you have the right to it.


We all have a right to our own opinions and I think we all have a right and responsibility to debate over them. How else can we progress together?
Just out of curiosity, When do you use 'physical aversives'? I assume you use rewards at times too?


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

dcguthrie7 said:


> Thanks for the input everyone, I guess I mostly seeked this forum to make sure I'm not a horrible person for it. I will cry my eyes out tomorrow when she goes, she was an amazing loving dog, minus this factor.
> 
> Any time I get an animal I do lots and lots of research, breed specific, training, etc. (I work in a research lab, research is my forte). We have done AKC "shy dog" classes as well as lots of other training, she is well trained, listens great, and has been an unbelievable dog minus the DA. I had always assumed her dog aggression was from my ex not properly socializing her as a puppy - which can obviously make any dog have behavioral issues. But after all the training we have done to work on it- lots of refocusing and attention training- I do believe this is a trait and can't be "cured" but only managed.


I'm sorry that you have to go through this, but it really does seem like the best thing for everyone involved for her to go live with her ex. It sounds like you've done pretty much everything you can, and I think you're doing right by her by rehoming her to a home you know can manage this issue.

(I also hope your new pup makes a full recovery!)


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Byakuzo said:


> The puppy didn't look guilty because it hadn't learned that poop inside is bad thing.


Why did the adult dog look "guilty," then? HE didn't poop in the house. 

My dogs are housetrained but occasionally have diarrhea, and they don't throw appeasement behaviors when they poop in the house. I wonder why that is?

Why does my dog throw appeasement behaviors when I get mad at the laptop? Guilt?


----------



## gingerkid (Jul 11, 2012)

sassafras said:


> Why did the adult dog look "guilty," then? HE didn't poop in the house.
> 
> My dogs are housetrained but occasionally have diarrhea, and they don't throw appeasement behaviors when they poop in the house. I wonder why that is?
> 
> Why does my dog throw appeasement behaviors when I get mad at the laptop? Guilt?


It's obviously Maisy's fault that the internet is so slow and she knows that you've figured it out.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

gingerkid said:


> It's obviously Maisy's fault that the internet is so slow and she knows that you've figured it out.


Oh. Em. Gee. She's controlling the internet because I'm not dominant.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Byakuzo said:


> We all have a right to our own opinions and I think we all have a right and responsibility to debate over them. How else can we progress together?
> Just out of curiosity, When do you use 'physical aversives'? I assume you use rewards at times too?


Yes I use rewards although not a lot of food rewards. I don't honestly know how to clicker train. 

I am pretty in tune with my dog, what she feels and what she is about to do, I'm usually one step ahead of her. I'm just really watchful and aware of what she might be thinking. It's rather complicated to explain.
I will leash pop once in a while. That's all I really do when it comes to physical "violence".


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Oh. Em. Gee. She's controlling the internet because I'm not dominant.


Much sarcasm. Much help. 


*rolls eyes*


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

Well this is an entertaining twist on the definition of dominance. I think it's one of the craziest I've seen here, even funnier based on how them claim to achieve this dominance.


----------



## JazzyTheSiberian (Feb 4, 2013)

What... An interesting thread. op2:



dcguthrie7 said:


> Thanks for the input everyone, I guess I mostly seeked this forum to make sure I'm not a horrible person for it. I will cry my eyes out tomorrow when she goes, she was an amazing loving dog, minus this factor.
> 
> Any time I get an animal I do lots and lots of research, breed specific, training, etc. (I work in a research lab, research is my forte). We have done AKC "shy dog" classes as well as lots of other training, she is well trained, listens great, and has been an unbelievable dog minus the DA. I had always assumed her dog aggression was from my ex not properly socializing her as a puppy - which can obviously make any dog have behavioral issues. But after all the training we have done to work on it- lots of refocusing and attention training- I do believe this is a trait and can't be "cured" but only managed.


You did all you good, and even more when you came and asked others advice, so try to not get too down on yourself too much.Rehoming doesn't always mean your a horrible person, and, from what you said, your not a horrible person.

Look- It can-and-does happen, even to the best of us. Even to those who are prepared. Who know how to manage these siuation. 

I'm sorry you going through this situation. Big ((((HUGS)))). I hope your puppy nakes a speddy recovery, and that all will be ok. Looking forward to updates.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

trek said:


> Much sarcasm. Much help.
> 
> 
> *rolls eyes*


Oh I didn't realize this was a No Fun Zone where I'm not allowed to joke with gingerkid. I'll ask your permission first. 


(THAT was sarcasm. The post you quoted was a joke. Pro Tip.)


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

dcguthrie7 said:


> Thanks for the input everyone, I guess I mostly seeked this forum to make sure I'm not a horrible person for it. I will cry my eyes out tomorrow when she goes, she was an amazing loving dog, minus this factor.


I think there are some rehomings that are indicative of the owner being a pretty horrible person. But a rehoming like yours, that's to the dog's benefit, to resolve an ongoing danger, and to a reliable person who knows the dog well and cares for it, is not one of those. It will hurt, but it will be the right and responsible thing to do for you, your pit, and your other dog. Difficult- or impossible-to-resolve issues can often be managed, but no management is perfect every single moment of every single day, so when a management breakdown is likely to mean death (in this case, of your other dog), management is not a good long-term solution. Rehoming is your best option, since you have a good home to send the dog to.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

dagwall said:


> Well this is an entertaining twist on the definition of dominance. I think it's one of the craziest I've seen here, even funnier based on how them claim to achieve this dominance.


I actually remember having an extremely similar debate with that... you remember the poster with the Great Pyrenees that she said was just like a Golden Retriever? The one who didn't really believe in breed traits and thought that anyone could train their GP to be like a golden? She had her own definition of dominance too.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Crantastic said:


> I actually remember having an extremely similar debate with that... you remember the poster with the Great Pyrenees that she said was just like a Golden Retriever? The one who didn't really believe in breed traits and thought that anyone could train their GP to be like a golden? She had her own definition of dominance too.


I remember that member


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

sassafras said:


> Oh I didn't realize this was a No Fun Zone where I'm not allowed to joke with gingerkid. I'll ask your permission first.
> 
> 
> (THAT was sarcasm. The post you quoted was a joke. Pro Tip.)


You are only allowed to have fun.... Because you now have a herding dog.


----------



## titiaamor (Nov 17, 2011)

Ummmm....you think dogs have guilt? That's putting human traits on an animoa and not supported with science.


Byakuzo said:


> Has your dog ever looked at you in a way that lets you know its done something you don't want it to do but its sorry?


----------



## titiaamor (Nov 17, 2011)

She's going back to the co-owner.....



trek said:


> I agree with you there but I'm going to come off as extremely harsh.
> First I would see a vet for health problems, some pain can make animals ornery and act out of character. She should have a full blood work up done, a senior panel as she is an older girl.
> 
> IF you can't crate and rotate, I would euthanize. There is a very LOW chance that anyone would want to adopt a senior pit bull type... very low chance. They are consistently euthanized as healthy young dogs, an old DA pit bull would have a snowball's chance in hell.
> Sometimes, there are things worse then death. If you can't be committed to a stringent crate and rotate scenario, then I would be merciful.


----------



## Paviche (Aug 26, 2011)

OP, I'm really sorry you were in that position and had to make that decision, but for what it's worth, you made the right choice. You did what's best for both of the dogs, and there's nothing you could have done differently to prevent this or change things. It is not your fault at all!

As for the rest of the thread: good lord.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Ouchy ouch ... this thread makes my brain hurt! I am glad the OP seems to have found a safe home for the dog, I wish them the best.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Why did the adult dog look "guilty," then? HE didn't poop in the house.
> 
> My dogs are housetrained but occasionally have diarrhea, and they don't throw appeasement behaviors when they poop in the house. I wonder why that is?
> 
> Why does my dog throw appeasement behaviors when I get mad at the laptop? Guilt?


I would have to see it for myself. If the dog knows what it is dong is wrong but can't help itself chances are its gonna show submissive gestures. pretending otherwise is ludicrous.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Byakuzo said:


> I would have to see it for myself. If the dog knows what it is dong is wrong but can't help itself chances are its gonna show submissive gestures. pretending otherwise is ludicrous.


Something is ludicrous, but it isn't that.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

Byakuzo said:


> I would have to see it for myself. If the dog knows what it is dong is wrong but can't help itself chances are its gonna show submissive gestures. pretending otherwise is ludicrous.


Dogs don't know what's "wrong" from a human standpoint. It's not wrong to a dog. They only know that sometimes the humans get mad when certain things happen, so they show appeasement behaviors to try to convince the human not to hurt them.


----------



## sandgrubber (May 21, 2014)

dcguthrie7 said:


> Thanks for the input everyone, I guess I mostly seeked this forum to make sure I'm not a horrible person for it. I will cry my eyes out tomorrow when she goes, she was an amazing loving dog, minus this factor.
> 
> Any time I get an animal I do lots and lots of research, breed specific, training, etc. (I work in a research lab, research is my forte). We have done AKC "shy dog" classes as well as lots of other training, she is well trained, listens great, and has been an unbelievable dog minus the DA. I had always assumed her dog aggression was from my ex not properly socializing her as a puppy - which can obviously make any dog have behavioral issues. But after all the training we have done to work on it- lots of refocusing and attention training- I do believe this is a trait and can't be "cured" but only managed.


You deserve respect for trying, and doing what you can. Sometimes the bottom line isn't what you'd like, and the urge to fight is pretty deeply wired. I don't think the DA problem is unique to pit bulls. I remember reading a sled dog book where the author said, quite simply, that some of his dogs loved to fight, so he had to keep them chained. Some men seem to have a similar problem  .


----------



## LittleFr0g (Jun 11, 2007)

Don't expect this to do much good, as the individual arguing the point clearly has their mind made up and is uninterested in learning, but thought I'd post this for those who are actually interested in learning, and what science has to say about the "guilty look". 
https://thesciencedog.wordpress.com/2015/04/21/death-throes-of-the-guilty-look/


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Byakuzo said:


> I would have to see it for myself. If the dog knows what it is dong is wrong but can't help itself chances are its gonna show submissive gestures. pretending otherwise is ludicrous.


The only reason why I am even responding to you is because all the advice you have posted, someone is going to read this (one of those "Joe Blow" owners you speak of) and think they can put their DA dog with their other dog and "make" them get along, and they are going to end up with one or more dead dogs. Dogs are like people, sometimes they just flat out dont like another dog, there is no reason, they just dont get along. Or, they could get along for YEARS and suddenly, they dont anymore, I have seen that too in JRTs, I have seen it in ACDs, GSDs, etc ... DA is NOT breed specific, but if you WANT to pick a "bully" breed that is most likely to develop DA, then I would say probably the game bred PB's have the most probability of developing DA.

For an example, this is my own experience with two dogs who do not (and still do not) get along, we never found out WHY they suddenly decided they dont like each other:

I have two dogs (not our two) that dont get along, they are Josefina and one of my parent's females. I keep them separated unless someone is out in the yard with them, if we are not, they are separated because they have had several snark fights and one serious one that involved blood (I was not there for any of them, our dog was staying there because where I lived didnt allow dogs). After that job ended and I came home, I kept them apart unless I was out there to supervise.

They were fine until one day they WERENT, my parent's dog was the instigator, she was always picking at Josefina and snarking at her, I told my folks that they had to keep them apart unless they were out there to supervise them (Josefina would have been fine inside, she has some age on her now and isnt as active as she once was), but they didnt, and a fight happened .

If I had kept these two dogs together as you say, we would have had one or more dead dogs.

OP- IF you end up keeping these two dogs for ANY reason (or the DA dog has to be returned to you or something) do NOT keep these two dogs together unattended. EVER.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

trek said:


> No. They were bred for DA. That was the whole purpose behind their breed development.
> As for how "natural" it is.... um, what? Dogs aren't natural. Essentially, they are retarded wolves that are bred to our liking... APBT's were bred for pit fighting. End.


I don't think you know as much as you think you do about Pit Bulls....or dogs for that matter if you think they are "retarded wolves".


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

RCloud said:


> I don't think you know as much as you think you do about Pit Bulls....or dogs for that matter if you think they are "retarded wolves".


LOL retarded wolves??? I just ... I can't even ... UGH.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

It's called neoteny. . .it's not technically incorrect to refer to it as a form of retardation. A little simplistic but not incorrect.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

I am going to change my forum signature to "I own retarded wolves"


----------



## Rescued (Jan 8, 2012)

Gah I am not usually the PC police but I am for that word, and pretty much only that word. reeeeeeallly rude and annoying, original user.

Also the rest of this thread is just lol.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

In the medical context, that is the correct word, isn't it? I knew a professor who would use it in the technical manner. It just means development has stopped (flame retardant?). There may be a new technical word for it now though, idk. 

As an insult, yes, it's terrible. Don't use that word as an insult.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I am going to change my forum signature to "I own retarded wolves"


Wouldnt we technically own "retarded dingoes"? LOL 

But yes, in all seriousness I also find the word "retarded" very rude and insulting.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

In this instance it means retention of traits seen in young, as in "dogs are like juvenile wolves" (which I'm not sure is even considered true anymore). Neoteny. But yeah, it's not a word I use in any context.


----------



## sandgrubber (May 21, 2014)

Willowy said:


> It's called neoteny. . .it's not technically incorrect to refer to it as a form of retardation. A little simplistic but not incorrect.


Neotony (or retardation) is an oversimplification at best. Dogs have lost some abilities through evolution, but they've gained others. Different breeds have evolved in different directions. If it were just a matter of neotony, dogs would be pretty much like wolf pups . . . and they aren't. Yah. Some people who are into noble savage sorts of ideas think dogs are a step backward from wolves. I'll bet most of them began their research with that preconceived notion and amassed data to 'prove' their ideological bias.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

It is an accurate description and not one meant to be offensive but we seem to be running into the PC crowd... *le sigh
The definition of retardation: slowness in development or progress. Which is what happened to dogs when they split off from wolves. 
If you left most dogs (besides dogs that have maintained some feral traits), they would die. They are fully dependent on us because they lost their wolf knowledge. We made them retarded.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

RCloud said:


> I don't think you know as much as you think you do about Pit Bulls....or dogs for that matter if you think they are "retarded wolves".


Interesting that that is what you cherry picked out of my statement.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Willowy said:


> In the medical context, that is the correct word, isn't it? I knew a professor who would use it in the technical manner. It just means development has stopped (flame retardant?). There may be a new technical word for it now though, idk.
> 
> As an insult, yes, it's terrible. Don't use that word as an insult.


 I'm almost 100% certain that no dogs were offended with my word usage


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Yea I think a lot of cities WISH dogs would die on their own if abandoned.


----------



## MastiffGuy (Mar 23, 2015)

First off I believe the OP is taking the correct action in the matter.

Actually just watched a program where they, where studying and showing limited and abstract reasoning by a Border Collie and a GSD in problem solving. 

While yes Bully breeds show a higher than normal rate of DA, correct socialization from a young age seems to make a huge difference as a adult. (OP stated that EX did not do this). My dog plays with several and have had zero issues. 

The whole domination thing. I can only hope no one ever tries that stuff with any of the mastiff breeds, it is a good way to get hurt. This method has shown a high rate of causing fear aggression.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

trek said:


> It is an accurate description and not one meant to be offensive but we seem to be running in an uber PC crowd... *le sigh
> The definition of retardation: slowness in development or progress. Which is what happened to dogs when they split off from wolves.
> If you left most dogs (besides dogs that have maintained some feral traits), they would die. They are fully dependent on us because they lost their wolf knowledge. We made them retarded.


Nah. A change of traits is not the same as a slowness of progress. Dogs progressed in ways that wolves didn't. Dogs have managed to be street dogs in many countries and survive in urban areas in a similar way that racooons for example have learned to reap the benefits of humans garbage. Obviously traffic and diseases kill street dogs but those same things would kill wolves too if they were in the same habitat.

As for pit bulls--- in this specific case it is clear that rehoming with a former owner is a very good idea. The former owner knows the dog, the dog will be comfortable there, the dog will be the only dog there, and the former owner knows to restrict access to other dogs. It is a responsible decision that should be a good place for the dog. 

Overall though, the type of pit bull that one gets from the shelter isn't likely to need to be isolated from dogs at all. One should assess the traits of the individual dog and not put the dog in a situation that could go wrong quickly like a free for all dog park, but living with another dog or taking walks with other dogs and similar is a real possibility. I have met game bred apbts, ones that have been in a pit or the offspring of them, by court seizure in criminal cases. That can be a whole different ballgame than your average bully mix at a shelter. Supervision is good for all kinds of dogs, watching out for resource guarding etc is important. But phenotype and genotype are often so different that a pit bull in a shelter is not always a pit bull and a non-pit isn't always a non-pit anyways. 

While anecdotes don't make data, I will say that Chester has only been bitten for real by a Border Collie and not by any of the pit types that have graced my house.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> It is an accurate description and not one meant to be offensive but we seem to be running into the PC crowd... *le sigh
> The definition of retardation: *slowness in development or progress.* Which is what happened to dogs when they split off from wolves.
> If you left most dogs (besides dogs that have maintained some feral traits), they would die. They are fully dependent on us because they lost their wolf knowledge. We made them retarded.


But well..... You are wrong.... by breeding dogs.... We have not slowed anything... We have accentuated the traits we find useful..... And diminished traits we did not want....

Feral is NOT a trait.... It is a state of being.... Using it in the context as you did.... You do have an understanding of what the term feral means.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

JohnnyBandit said:


> But well..... You are wrong.... by breeding dogs.... We have not slowed anything... We have accentuated the traits we find useful..... And diminished traits we did not want....
> 
> Feral is NOT a trait.... It is a state of being.... Using it in the context as you did.... You do have an understanding of what the term feral means.


 I'm not comparing dogs to dogs. I'm comparing dogs to wolves. Wolves are a successful species with no assistance from us, dogs require our constant assistance. Dogs have retarded from their wolf ancestors.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Shell said:


> Nah. A change of traits is not the same as a slowness of progress. Dogs progressed in ways that wolves didn't. Dogs have managed to be street dogs in many countries and survive in urban areas in a similar way that racooons for example have learned to reap the benefits of humans garbage. Obviously traffic and diseases kill street dogs but those same things would kill wolves too if they were in the same habitat.
> 
> As for pit bulls--- in this specific case it is clear that rehoming with a former owner is a very good idea. The former owner knows the dog, the dog will be comfortable there, the dog will be the only dog there, and the former owner knows to restrict access to other dogs. It is a responsible decision that should be a good place for the dog.
> 
> ...


 So are dogs wolf cousins or a completely different species? You can't have it both ways. 
If a species goes from being completely unreliant on humans, to completely reliant that = retardation.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Once again, I think a lot of cities/countries would really like it if their feral dog populations actually required constant assistance.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

sassafras said:


> Once again, I think a lot of cities/countries would really like it if their feral dog populations actually required constant assistance.


Feral dogs still depend on humans in a roundabout way. They thrive off of our garbage, they find shelter within our decrepit buildings, they get pity from the locals. Very few would survive in a wild environment.


----------



## MastiffGuy (Mar 23, 2015)

trek said:


> So are dogs wolf cousins or a completely different species? You can't have it both ways.
> If a species goes from being completely unreliant on humans, to completely reliant that = retardation.


Kinda both. There from a extinct species of wolf. While they are related to todays wolf, they are not from todays wolves.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

trek said:


> So are dogs wolf cousins or a completely different species? You can't have it both ways.
> If a species goes from being completely unreliant on humans, to completely reliant that = retardation.


Are horses domestic animals or not?

Mustangs live their lives just fine without humans. Maybe too well since their numbers can overwhelm the natural resources of an area. Yet moet people would look at the average riding horse, show horse, race horse whatever, and say that the horse needs humans. Along a similar line, dogs are NOT completely relient on humans at all. If they were, then no area would have an issue with stray packs of dogs.

Dogs may be relient on human to live to their expected lifespan, to live without common contagious illness etc, but simply living as a species can be done without being pets.

All of which has pretty much zero to do with a dog that has dog aggression.

The dog in question, regardless of breed, needs to be an only dog. It happens, among a variety of breeds. 

Pit bull types in general do not need to be totally isolated from other dogs. They need to be assessed as individuals and owners do need to be aware of their potential for DA but its not a given by any means and many pit types greatly enjoy the company of known dog companions.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

trek said:


> Very few would survive in a wild environment.


What are you basing this opinion on?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> I'm not comparing dogs to dogs. I'm comparing dogs to wolves. Wolves are a successful species with no assistance from us, dogs require our constant assistance. Dogs have retarded from their wolf ancestors.


there are MORE wild domestic dogs in the world in highly variable environments. Domestic dogs on their own are HIGHLY adaptable..... Then there are wolves... Which are not very adaptable and highly environment dependent. 

By the way...... The definition of Feral - A domesticated animal that is living in a wild state. 

It is not a trait at all. But rather a state in which the animal is living.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Shell said:


> Are horses domestic animals or not?
> 
> Mustangs live their lives just fine without humans. Maybe too well since their numbers can overwhelm the natural resources of an area. Yet moet people would look at the average riding horse, show horse, race horse whatever, and say that the horse needs humans. Along a similar line, dogs are NOT completely relient on humans at all. If they were, then no area would have an issue with stray packs of dogs.
> 
> ...


 YOU have a bull/terrier type. YOU love your dog. Yet you spread your delusion to the masses about the breed? So counter productive! 
This dog was "fine" for SEVEN years. Hear that? SEVEN! 
What more do you need to know to stop perpetuating the idea that "all dogs are individuals". Then quit breeding them if there is no such thing as type. 
This dog almost killed another dog. Because the dog was considered fine. Because everyone perpetuatea the idea to give themselves all the warm fuzzies.



JohnnyBandit said:


> there are MORE wild domestic dogs in the world in highly variable environments. Domestic dogs on their own are HIGHLY adaptable..... Then there are wolves... Which are not very adaptable and highly environment dependent.
> 
> By the way...... The definition of Feral - A domesticated animal that is living in a wild state.
> 
> It is not a trait at all. But rather a state in which the animal is living.



What is your point? This doesn't prove that today's dog is in fact retarded from their wolf counterparts.


----------



## xChlorineAddict (Jul 17, 2014)

I only skimmed through the thread, so my apologies if I'm just repeating.

But here is a different perspective on the human dog dominance thing -

There is a rat and a dog. The dog starts chasing the rat. The dog MUST be showing dominance, right? But it is not at all. It's chasing the rat because it's entertaining / prey drive. 

It's the exact same thing with humans.. dogs cannot communicate with rats and it's fair to say that they won't see them as "pack members"


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

trek said:


> YOU have a bull/terrier type. YOU love your dog. Yet you spread your delusion to the masses about the breed? So counter productive!
> This dog was "fine" for SEVEN years. Hear that? SEVEN!
> What more do you need to know to stop perpetuating the idea that "all dogs are individuals". Then quit breeding them if there is no such thing as type.
> This dog almost killed another dog. Because the dog was considered fine. Because everyone perpetuatea the idea to give themselves all the warm fuzzies.
> .



The OP's dog was not fine for 7 years. The dog was KNOWN to be dog aggressive. The dog was KNOWN to have issues with unknown dogs. The dog was giving out plenty of warning signs. 

I don't spread any delusion or any myth and I certainly don't breed any type of dog. I look at information overall along with my own observations of a few hundred bully breed types from shelters and elsewhere. They do vary widely. They do range from very DA to basically not at all. It is good for an owner to realize that the potential exists but isolating a dog that shows zero DA just because of a visible breed trait is silly. 

I have met a known APBT mix that had long hair, tri-color and look every inch an Aussie. Should that dog be treated like an Aussie or a pit bull? If the parentage was not known, what woud you expect from the dog?

The OP's dog showed signs that could happen with other breeds too btw.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

I don't think you understand breeding or type very well. If dogs weren't individuals, breeders wouldn't have to try to match puppies to homes, they'd just hand them out first come first serve. Because they are all exactly the same?

Dogs ARE individuals and will have varying degrees of breed traits. Otherwise there would be no such things as washouts in working lines, for example.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> So are dogs wolf cousins or a completely different species? You can't have it both ways.
> If a species goes from being completely unreliant on humans, to completely reliant that = retardation.


From what I understand of the science, we're not 100% sure. They may have branched off from wolves, or they may just have a common ancestor with wolves that died off. Kinda like how we didn't "evolve" from monkeys, but have a common ancestor with them


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

I knew a pit bull that lived to be 14. He never attacked a dog. Even when he was dying of cancer, he was sweet and gentle toward the mini poodle he lived with.

There are a lot of neighbors who don't train their pits, but Clyde has been attacked by a GSD, a doxie, and a brittany spaniel. Chis and JRTs have tried to start fights with him. And we have a lot of pits where I live.


----------



## Eenypup (Mar 21, 2014)

We have absolutely NO idea that a bully-looking dog is anywhere near DA descendants, so a bull breed doesn't have to be just a random washout of very game ABPT lines to be dog friendly to some degree. So, so many random bully mixes aren't APBT at all, or are so far gone from their dog aggressive ancestors that the trait has washed out. No one is trying to say bull breeds aren't more likely to be DA or not tolerant or strange dogs. Stop talking yourself in circles about that, you sound ridiculous painting all similar look rescue and BYB with the same wide brush.

And OP said her dog was fine for 7 years with THIS dog, and now because circumstances changed so did the dogs feelings for whatever reason. Not strange for a dog that she said was KNOWN to be DA toward some dogs.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> What is your point? This doesn't prove that today's dog is in fact retarded from their wolf counterparts.


Actually it proves the opposite.. thanks for playing... The modern dog is more adaptable in a wild state than the wolf.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

You all don't seem to get the point. 

I'm not arguing that dogs are individuals. I'm arguing that there is a very SPECIFIC risk of believing this breed (and other bull/terriers) should socialize with other dogs. That risk includes injury and death to the other dog, possible redirection injuries to parties involved and most importantly BSL which MAINLY affects APBT's and dogs that looks similar. 

I make blanket statements because it is the safest option. The demographic that reads this forum would generally not be trusted to know when a bull/terrier is going to get out of hand ... consider the initial post. 

We can argue this all day long, or agree to disagree. Because you will not be persuading me that what I am stating is incorrect and over the top. It is cautious. 
Keep taking chances though.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Actually it proves the opposite.. thanks for playing... The modern dog is more adaptable in a wild state than the wolf.


 You are attempting to argue me in circles but I'm not willing to engage so... be prepared to be ignored. Until you have a valid point to make.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> You all don't seem to get the point.
> 
> I'm not arguing that dogs are individuals. I'm arguing that there is a very SPECIFIC risk of believing this dog should socialize with other dogs. That risk includes injury and death to the other dog, possible redirection injuries to parties involved and most importantly BSL which MAINLY affects APBT's and dogs that looks similar.
> 
> ...


I feel like.... that's kinda racist. Like, not actually. But it really _feels _racist.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

We DO get the point. We just disagree that your blanket statement is a reasonable reaction to the possibility of DA.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

sassafras said:


> We DO get the point. We just disagree that your blanket statement is a reasonable reaction to the possibility of DA.


 Well that's your problem, not mine. My problem is people who don't GET it. And trust me, you don't GET it at all.


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

trek said:


> YOU have a bull/terrier type. YOU love your dog. Yet you spread your delusion to the masses about the breed? So counter productive!
> This dog was "fine" for SEVEN years. Hear that? SEVEN!
> What more do you need to know to stop perpetuating the idea that "all dogs are individuals". Then quit breeding them if there is no such thing as type.
> This dog almost killed another dog. Because the dog was considered fine. Because everyone perpetuatea the idea to give themselves all the warm fuzzies.


You need to get your story straight. Earlier you said you are just dumbing things down for the gp. It's clear that that is not the case at all. You legitimately believe that the vast majority of pit bulls should be isolated from other dogs regardless of their temperament. Just own it.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

By Trek's logic, we should never have exposed Clyde to people or dogs because his breed is prone to DA and HA. Especially small dogs...but he has lived with them from birth and loves strange friendly humans.

...we should have never introduced either of our chihuahuas to the pet snakes because the breed has prey drive, but our first one just ignored them and Louie was trained to ignore them because he reacted mildly to them.

If a bull breed mix never expresses any form of DA, it's not very likely to magically "snap" and turn on other dogs with its "locking jaws". Obviously general caution should still be exercised with the dog, but that doesn't mean isolate it.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

trek said:


> Well that's your problem, not mine. My problem is people who don't GET it. And trust me, you don't GET it at all.


It's not my problem that I don't agree with an opinion I don't agree with, lol.

And yes, I GET it. I don't AGREE with you, though. You're not the dictator of correctness on this issue because you say so, lol.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> Well that's your problem, not mine. My problem is people who don't GET it. And trust me, you don't GET it at all.


Did a pittie bite your face off? Cause it seems like maybe a pittie bit your face off.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

sassafras said:


> We DO get the point. We just disagree that your blanket statement is a reasonable reaction to the possibility of DA.


Aye yep.

Educating someone on the potential for DA, signs of DA, management techniques for DA, and similar are all good ideas.

But isolating dogs that may likely enjoy the company of other dogs or at least be completely comfortable with the company of other dogs just because they have a physical type that can be slightly more prone to DA? Not very useful or reasonable at all.

Again, the physical appearance of a dog and the genetics within that dog can be very very different. Even if appearance and genes match, there are a whole lot of people breeding pit types with very minimal DA issues.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

chimunga said:


> I feel like.... that's kinda racist. Like, not actually. But it really _feels _racist.


 Why do all people believe that dogs need other dogs? Why is there this constant need to anthropomorphize? -*I* need to be around people so my dogs *MUST* need to be around dogs. It's really not true at all, though there may be some exceptions.

Bull/terriers thrive off of HUMAN companionship... dogs are really not on their radar when their people are in the vicinity.

But nothing will get in the way of the pibble wibble wovey dovey crowd. I can't stop the ignorance, I'll just keep on arguing so that I can make sense to someone with more sense.

Risk vs reward. Apparently the risk to lose the lives of other dogs is worth it to you. And what's more! The risk of BSL. 
Thank you for being part of the problem.


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

trek said:


> I make blanket statements because it is the safest option. The demographic that reads this forum would generally not be trusted to know when a bull/terrier is going to get out of hand ... consider the initial post.


The safest option is not to own a dog at all.


----------



## MastiffGuy (Mar 23, 2015)

trek said:


> You all don't seem to get the point.
> 
> I'm not arguing that dogs are individuals.* I'm arguing that there is a very SPECIFIC risk of believing this breed (and other bull/terriers) should socialize with other dogs. That risk includes injury and death to the other dog, possible redirection injuries to parties involved and most importantly BSL which MAINLY affects APBT's and dogs that looks similar.*
> 
> ...


Oh just when I'm about to just ignore a thread.
So basically by isolating them all your solving the issue? Maybe if you try socializing them as a pup and continue through out there life? Pretty sure you are going to be more likely to have issues with isolating a dog, and it developing DA/HA.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> Why do all people believe that dogs need other dogs? Why is there this constant need to anthropomorphize? -*I* need to be around people so my dogs *MUST* need to be around dogs. It's really not true at all, though there may be some exceptions.
> 
> Bull/terriers thrive off of HUMAN companionship... dogs are really not on their radar when their people are in the vicinity.


That's not what I was talking about at all. Literally was not talking about that at all. 

I was talking about negatively generalizing a breed based off their "history." Which kinda seems a bit like racism.


----------



## Eenypup (Mar 21, 2014)

Many bull breed dogs get nothing out of, or hate, being around other dogs. Many love all dogs. Many enjoy playing with a known dog with close supervision. It's like anything in life. Educate about the risks and be cautious when there's reason to be.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

> Bull/terriers thrive off of HUMAN companionship... dogs are really not on their radar when their people are in the vicinity.


Lol you clearly have clearly not been around bull breed mixes...good one...


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

trek said:


> Why do all people believe that dogs need other dogs? Why is there this constant need to anthropomorphize? -*I* need to be around people so my dogs *MUST* need to be around dogs. It's really not true at all, though there may be some exceptions.
> 
> Bull/terriers thrive off of HUMAN companionship... dogs are really not on their radar when their people are in the vicinity.


Some dogs like being around dogs, some dogs don't. Bully breeds do tend to love human companionship maybe as compared to the typical hound for example, but I know a lot of bullies that really do gravitate towards their fellow dogs for a cuddle session or play session. They may not NEED other dogs, but if the owner has other dogs or has close friends or family with other dogs, then they often enjoy their time together.

No dog of ANY breed is 100% on anything until that dog has passed along. Not on recall, not on DA, etc. But i can reference a whole lot of bully types that have either passed along without incident or are well onto their years and still not DA, all while enjoying the company of other dogs until reasonably supervised conditions.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> You all don't seem to get the point.
> 
> .


We get your point.... And your point is wrong....


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

...The actual demographic of this board, for the record, has a higher than usual number of people than represented in the general public that are professional trainers, doing advanced training, competing in various activities and sports with their dogs and doing so successfully, foster homes, and shelter workers and other people working with large number of dogs. 

And, you know, no. Making blanket statements doesn't really make it a safer stance to take to the general public. Most people have known, or know, a pit type that is fine with other dogs. All a blanket statement does is make them disregard anything useful present within it. Like the fact that they MAY be DA to some degree and you should be prepared for that if you decide to get a pit, and that you don't really 'socialize' it out of them and the safest way to be sure of getting a dog friendly dog is to get one that is 4+ years old, puppies are really hard to judge since almost all of them are friendly, and even with an older dog it's not an absolute guarantee. 

NO PITS INTERACT WITH OTHER DOGS EVER THEY WILL MAIM AND KILL makes every single person who has experienced the opposite snort, roll their eyes, and ignore you utterly. That is the opposite of helpful.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> You are attempting to argue me in circles but I'm not willing to engage so... be prepared to be ignored. Until you have a valid point to make.


You are the one that is talking yourself in circles.... You need no help from me...

And you have yet to make a valid point on this thread. Does that mean you are ignoring yourself?


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

JohnnyBandit said:


> We get your point.... And your point is wrong....


No it's not. But you'll go on some long self absorbed rant "proving" it. Good luck


----------



## MastiffGuy (Mar 23, 2015)

trek said:


> Why do all people believe that dogs need other dogs? Why is there this constant need to anthropomorphize? -*I* need to be around people so my dogs *MUST* need to be around dogs. It's really not true at all, though there may be some exceptions.
> 
> Bull/terriers thrive off of HUMAN companionship... dogs are really not on their radar when their people are in the vicinity.
> 
> ...


Ok try to stop toting the BSL banner. 
Do you only have your dogs at home, 100% sure they will never get out, you never walk your dogs?
Oh and total nonsense they only thrive on human contact, my dog plays with 2 daily, and trust me they love rough housing with each other.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

JohnnyBandit said:


> You are the one that is talking yourself in circles.... You need no help from me...
> 
> And you have yet to make a valid point on this thread. Does that mean you are ignoring yourself?


So you advocate APBT's playing with other dogs for the general public.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

trek said:


> But nothing will get in the way of the pibble wibble wovey dovey crowd.


If you think that everyone who disagrees with you is part of that crowd, you haven't been reading very carefully.


----------



## Eenypup (Mar 21, 2014)

trek said:


> So you advocate APBT's playing with other dogs for the general public.


Not a single person on this entire thread has said that. At all. And I don't know anyone here who is into "pibble wibbly nanny dog" BS.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> No it's not. But you'll go on some long self absorbed rant "proving" it. Good luck


Well, why don't you prove your point then. Please explain to me, in one post, why no pit should ever be around another dog. None of this "I've already explained that" BS. I actually want to hear your full and real argument. Please take the time to explain it to me. I will genuinely appreciate it. Please keep in mind that, no, we are no the general public. The vast majority of us on here are dedicated and responsible pet owners. We're not average Joe dog owners. No snark. I would actually be interested in your reasons.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

chimunga said:


> That's not what I was talking about at all. Literally was not talking about that at all.
> 
> I was talking about negatively generalizing a breed based off their "history." Which kinda seems a bit like racism.


Pit fighting became illegal in the 70's. There are still lines that are bred off of their fighting ancestors- Eli, Colby, Bordeaux, Nigerino to name a few.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

trek said:


> So you advocate APBT's playing with other dogs for the general public.


No, all anyone is doing is advocating evaluating each dog as an individual and educating owners to be prepared for the possibility of DA and how to manage it IF it occurs rather than advocating a scorched earth policy.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

chimunga said:


> Well, why don't you prove your point then. Please explain to me, in one post, why no pit should ever be around another dog. No of this "I've already explained that" BS. I actually want to hear your full and real argument. Please take the time to explain it to me. I will genuinely appreciate it. Please keep in mind that, no, we are no the general public. The vast majority of us on here are dedicated and responsible pet owners. We're not average Joe dog owners. No snark. I would actually be interested in your reasons.


Read back. I already answered those questions.


----------



## Eenypup (Mar 21, 2014)

trek said:


> Pit fighting became illegal in the 70's. There are still lines that are bred off of their fighting ancestors- Eli, Colby, Bordeaux, Nigerino to name a few.


Yup. But we aren't talking about APBTs from known DA lines.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Eenypup said:


> Not a single person on this entire thread has said that. At all. And I don't know anyone here who is into "pibble wibbly nanny dog" BS.


Someone should go through this whole thread and quote every single instance someone said something like 'not good dog park dogs' 'shouldn't be in free for alls with strange dogs' 'be prepared for the possibility' 'various degrees of dog friendliness/selectivity/aggressive' etc. That person is not me, but there's sure as heck no lack of people saying that, while also saying 'saying no pit ever should be around another dog is baloney'. In fact I'm pretty sure every person who thinks this person argument is baloney has said so. 

(Which is to say I agree with you and my god I give them points for dedication even if I can't give them any for logic or sense)


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

sassafras said:


> No, all anyone is doing is advocating evaluating each dog as an individual and educating owners to be prepared for the possibility of DA and how to manage it IF it occurs rather than advocating a scorched earth policy.


 How long do you suppose it takes for one dog to kill another? How do you know what signs they will give that they are about to do so? And most importantly, does the GP?


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Eenypup said:


> Yup. But we aren't talking about APBTs from known DA lines.


How do you know that the dogs in a shelter do not have something similar in them?


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

trek said:


> So you advocate APBT's playing with other dogs for the general public.


I would, and emphasize doing so slowly and carefully. There are plenty of youtube videos showing how to safely introduce a dog with an unknown temperament to a potential new play buddy.

It isn't hard to learn this stuff.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> How long do you suppose it takes for one dog to kill another? How do you know what signs they will give that they are about to do so? And most importantly, does the GP?


Why are you still talking about the general public? It's already been established that we're not really the general public.


----------



## Eenypup (Mar 21, 2014)

trek said:


> How do you know that the dogs in a shelter do not have something similar in them?


I don't. How do I know a fluffy golden dog in the shelter doesn't have a grandparent that has something similar in them? How do I know the "pit bull" in the shelter isn't a very dog friendly boxer mix? Why don't I do the intelligent thing and take precautions with alleged bull breeds when it comes to introducing them to other dogs, but not exclaim that they must never be anywhere near another dog as long as they live?


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

I think you're a very scared person. It must be terrible to live in your world.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

trek said:


> How do you know that the dogs in a shelter do not have something similar in them?


How do you know that the double coated, tri.colored dog from the shelter doesn't? Or the mastiff type. Or the smaller rat terrier type? Or the Boxer type? 

Appearance means surprisingly little in dogs as far as their genetics go.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

Eenypup said:


> I don't. How do I know a fluffy golden dog in the shelter doesn't have a grandparent that has something similar in them? How do I know the "pit bull" in the shelter isn't a very dog friendly boxer mix? Why don't I do the intelligent thing and take precautions with alleged bull breeds when it comes to introducing them to other dogs, but not exclaim that they must never be anywhere near another dog as long as they live?


This is a good one.

Do you know HOW MANY other breeds are prone to DA? Why are pits being singled out here? Should any mix (or apparent mix) of any dog that is known to have a high incidence of DA not be allowed to interact with other dogs? What should I tell my GSD/Pyr X and BC? (Tip: All 3 breeds represented are ones who very often have issues with other dogs. 4 if Molly is the ACD/BC mix she could be instead of purebred that she apparently is. Neither of them do).


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> No it's not. But you'll go on some long self absorbed rant "proving" it. Good luck


I have already proved my point...... And about three hundred years of dog experience has been telling you that you are clueless.....


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

I honestly can't handle this. I can't stop people from being willfully obtuse but this mindset is one that seems common amongst *dog people*. 
You refuse to see reason because it goes against your firmly planted anthropomorphic mindset. 

There is proof in this thread ALONE that bull/terriers can decide to not like a dog after YEARS! Google pit bull Attacks dog, what do I do... I can guarantee you'll see hundreds (if not thousands) of hits. 

You are either too arrogant about your abilities or you have way to much faith in the general public. 

I've made direct points that make perfect sense to the sensible. So I will leave this thread to die in a spattering of sarcasm, ridiculous memes or some other silliness that I refuse to take part in.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

trek said:


> Interesting that that is what you cherry picked out of my statement.


lol Cherry picked what? I quoted exactly what you said to me, and responded with what I thought was even worth responding to you with.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I have already proved my point...... And about three hundred years of dog experience has been telling you that you are clueless.....


 I'm talking to a 300 year old man. This discussion has now become worth it.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

trek said:


> You refuse to see reason because it goes against your firmly planted anthropomorphic mindset.


No, your ego refuses to recognize that someone else's opinion is not wrong just because it's not yours, and you refuse to see reason because you are making decisions from a place of fear and paranoia. 

But I'm sure _everyone else_ is wrong and you are the lone voice of Truth in the universe.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> I honestly can't handle this. I can't stop people from being willfully obtuse but this mindset is one that seems common amongst *dog people*.
> You refuse to see reason because it goes against your firmly planted anthropomorphic mindset.
> 
> There is proof in this thread ALONE that bull/terriers can decide to not like a dog after YEARS! Google pit bull Attacks dog, what do I do... I can guarantee you'll see hundreds (if not thousands) of hits.
> ...


I gave you an opening. I really wanted to hear your reasoning. I'm genuinely curious. You haven't made direct points. We all know the statistics. All you're saying is that Bully breeds have a history of DA. So that means they should never be around any other dogs. That is literally all you have said. 

We're not anthropomorphising (ooh ten dolla word). We just think it's all very unrealistic and reactionary to keep a bully breed away from dogs it's entire life.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> So you advocate APBT's playing with other dogs for the general public.


I do not advocate dogs going to dog parks at all.....

But I grew up with...... and have owned GAME bred APBTs bred HARD on Wallace lines...... 
And we NEEDED them to be game bred because we used them to catch hogs. 

Your entire way of thinking is amusing.....


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

trek said:


> I honestly can't handle this. I can't stop people from being willfully obtuse but this mindset is one that seems common amongst *dog people*.
> You refuse to see reason because it goes against your firmly planted anthropomorphic mindset.
> 
> There is proof in this thread ALONE that bull/terriers can decide to not like a dog after YEARS! Google pit bull Attacks dog, what do I do... I can guarantee you'll see hundreds (if not thousands) of hits.
> ...


Actually, if you do a proper Google search on pit bull attacks, then you will find that breed classification in the media and even in animal control is lacking at best. If you search for breed DNA testing, you will find that it is not at all even plausible for most breeds.

Any dog or any other animal can decide to not like another animal after a time period. I am sure that you have heard of friends or family members have violent disputes, right? In this case, the dog showed DA towards other dogs which put that dog at an elevated risk towards DA in general so it did not at all come out of nowhere. 

The OP is doing the responsible thing and rehoming with a prior owner who understands the dog.


----------



## Eenypup (Mar 21, 2014)

No one would deny that a dog with known DA might end up deciding they don't like any particular dog after years?? My dog isn't completely dog friendly and just because she's played with my dad's dog in the past, doesn't mean I let my guard down. A high value item, another dog being introduced, my dog being in pain, any of those things could trigger my dog to decide she doesn't like this dog she's previously been fine with. This could also happen with a non bull breed. More likely with a bully breed? Sure. Doesn't mean my dog can't interact with this dog ever.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> I honestly can't handle this. I can't stop people from being willfully obtuse but this mindset is one that seems common amongst *dog people*.
> You refuse to see reason because it goes against your firmly planted anthropomorphic mindset.
> 
> There is proof in this thread ALONE that bull/terriers can decide to not like a dog after YEARS! Google pit bull Attacks dog, what do I do... I can guarantee you'll see hundreds (if not thousands) of hits.
> ...


Only person that is arrogant is you.... You have no idea what you are talking about..... But when knowledgeable folks with years and years and years of direct experience let you know that you are incorrect and downright wrong.... You dig your heels in....

You could learn something.... But you are too arrogant for that to happen...


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Only person that is arrogant is you.... You have no idea what you are talking about..... But when knowledgeable folks with years and years and years of direct experience let you know that you are incorrect and downright wrong.... You dig your heels in....
> 
> You could learn something.... But you are too arrogant for that to happen...


Who said that I don't have years and years of experience? Not 300 years certainly...
Please bestow upon me your infinite knowledge Johnny! I will humbly accept it and change my ways... said no one ever.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> Who said that I don't have years and years of experience? Not 300 years certainly...
> Please bestow upon me your infinite knowledge Johnny! I will humbly accept it and change my ways... said no one ever.


Actually. Yes. That is what reasonable people say. "Oh hey, I like your argument, it makes sense, and you managed change my mind. Thanks for the interesting conversation."


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

Eenypup said:


> No one would deny that a dog with known DA might end up deciding they don't like any particular dog after years?? My dog isn't completely dog friendly and just because she's played with my dad's dog in the past, doesn't mean I let my guard down. A high value item, another dog being introduced, my dog being in pain, any of those things could trigger my dog to decide she doesn't like this dog she's previously been fine with. This could also happen with a non bull breed. More likely with a bully breed? Sure. Doesn't mean my dog can't interact with this dog ever.


 Isn't your dog suspected HA? I suppose you're self reassuring right now?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> I'm talking to a 300 year old man. This discussion has now become worth it.


Nope..... But combine me, Sass, Captjack, RCloud, Shell, Eenypup and all the other knowledgeable folks... It adds up. 

Heck not to age anyone... But if you add up the years of practical hands on dog experience, on a daily and professional ( professional=someone that gets paid by others for their knowledge and expertise.) of Sass, myself, and CaptJack... You have over a hundred years right there.


----------



## trek (Apr 26, 2015)

chimunga said:


> Actually. Yes. That is what reasonable people say. "Oh hey, I like your argument, it makes sense, and you managed change my mind. Thanks for the interesting conversation."


He has actually said nothing about what I've said aside from "that's dumb"... really!? Stop kissing ass, it's sad.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> Who said that I don't have years and years of experience? Not 300 years certainly...
> Please bestow upon me your infinite knowledge Johnny! I will humbly accept it and change my ways... said no one ever.


You did..... You posts show are severe lack of knowledge.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> Isn't your dog suspected HA? I suppose you're self reassuring right now?


Nice ad hominem.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> He has actually said nothing about what I've said aside from "that's dumb"... really!? Stop kissing ass, it's sad.


And again. We don't agree with your point so you start attacking us directly. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

trek said:


> He has actually said nothing about what I've said aside from "that's dumb"... really!? Stop kissing ass, it's sad.


Because just about everything you've said has been wrong.


----------



## JazzyTheSiberian (Feb 4, 2013)

trek said:


> Who said that I don't have years and years of experience? Not 300 years certainly...
> Please bestow upon me your infinite knowledge Johnny! I will humbly accept it and change my ways... said no one ever.


Where do you even come up with this information?

People will have varying opinions. Not everyone will agree with you, especially when... You get state what you state. Does it mean your "opinion" isn't true? No, not necessarily. BUT it CAN be wrong. Deal with it.


----------



## Eenypup (Mar 21, 2014)

You're not going to even pretend you have a logical argument or information to back up your original viewpoint anymore? Now you're just going to personally go after everyone else because they disagree with you? Sounds productive!


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

trek said:


> Your posts show EXTREME arrogance, narcissism and self absorption.
> You sir, are a jack ass. Your blue dog looks fat, might want to get on that.


ooooh. You gon' get in trouble.


----------



## MastiffGuy (Mar 23, 2015)

*For TREK*
Going with a real question. Might have said it before and I just missed it, but how much first hand experience do you have with APBT and or other bully breeds?
Also how many have you owned, if you have?


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

trek said:


> Isn't your dog suspected HA? I suppose you're self reassuring right now?


HA and DA are totally separate issues and someone that maybe doesn't have a lot of in-person observations of a dog can be forgiven for asking questions online. Which happened to indicate no real aggression anyway.

There are many dogs of many breeds that show DA. Many who show dog selectivity, dog reactivity or something less than DA but still something to be monitored, but none if that indicates that a short haired dog with a wide face and jaw should be premptively isolated from dogs in general.


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

Basically all pit bulls, apparently:


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

You ever notice how people see flaws they possess absolutely everywhere? Like in their pets, animals, other people?

Yeah.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

trek said:


> Your posts show EXTREME arrogance, narcissism and self absorption.
> You sir, are a jack ass. Your blue dog looks fat, might want to get on that.


It's funny you call everyone else arrogant. People might have been willing to have a decent conversation with you about this if it hadn't of been for your arrogant, crappy attitude right from the start.


----------



## Eenypup (Mar 21, 2014)

Shell said:


> HA and DA are totally separate issues and someone that maybe doesn't have a lot of in-person observations of a dog can be forgiven for asking questions online. Which happened to indicate no real aggression anyway.


Yes, I deeply apologize for asking people with more experience in dog-child interactions to weigh in because I want to be a safe, responsible dog owner. Such a sin to be worried about behavior I've never seen before! And that's so completely unrelated to this "discussion" about dog aggression that you can't even pretend you're trying to make a valid point anymore.


----------



## JazzyTheSiberian (Feb 4, 2013)

trek said:


> Your posts show EXTREME arrogance, narcissism and self absorption.
> You sir, are a jack ass. Your blue dog looks fat, might want to get on that.


That isn't true.

And, Actually, you are. Someone who purposely calls out someone else, says thar their dog is fat, says


> Your posts show EXTREME arrogance, narcissism and self absorption.


 is someone who is incredible rude.


----------



## chimunga (Aug 29, 2014)

sassafras said:


> Basically all pit bulls, apparently:


BRB. Dying.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

trek said:


> Your posts show EXTREME arrogance, narcissism and self absorption.
> You sir, are a jack ass. Your blue dog looks fat, might want to get on that.



LMAO.... My dog fat.... I love you.....


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

johnnybandit said:


> lmao.... My dog fat.... I love you.....


fwahahaha!


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

I was told not to get an Anatolian. Person telling me had one and had to euth it because it attacked their other dogs. 
I was told not to get a Doberman. This breed is known to attack their owner when their brain gets bigger and the pressure in the skull causes them to attack their owner.
I was told not to get a Malamute. This breed will eat my child as it sleeps in it s crib
I was told not to get a cat when I had kids. The cat will jump in the crib and suck the breath right out of my baby
I was told not to get a Rott when I had young children The Rott will attack my kids unprovked


I am glad I did not listen to urban legends or I would have missed knowing some of the greatest most loving devoted pets.''

Without being there and not seeing what the human is doing or the other dog is doing just the end result it is hard to judge a dog. Big vs. small my bet is on the big most of the time. 


As far as killing time depends on size and experience. Experienced dog=one bite, one shake inexperienced dog= luck of the draw


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

The sad thing is, if what we're worried about is lurkers/general public reading threads like this... there really was an opportunity for education - interpreting body language, making proper introductions and evaluation of dogs' reactions to other dogs, what environments are/aren't appropriate (dog park vs classes vs playing with 1-2 other dogs), how to redirect fixated behavior, break up fights, etc... and instead it's devolved into this mess.

It's like teaching abstinence. Doesn't work in practice.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

sassafras said:


> Basically all pit bulls, apparently:


Yeah, Eva might be plotting something if she wanted to expend the energy.... I guess I had better go wake them up from a sound sleep and tell them not to sleep so soundly close to each other...


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

sassafras said:


> The sad thing is, if what we're worried about is lurkers/general public reading threads like this... there really was an opportunity for education - interpreting body language, making proper introductions and evaluation of dogs' reactions to other dogs, what environments are/aren't appropriate (dog park vs classes vs playing with 1-2 other dogs), how to redirect fixated behavior, break up fights, etc... and instead it's devolved into this mess.
> 
> It's like teaching abstinence. Doesn't work in practice.


Agreed. this could have been a really educational discussion.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

RCloud said:


> Agreed. this could have been a really educational discussion.


Yes it could have been.....


----------



## JazzyTheSiberian (Feb 4, 2013)

sassafras said:


> The sad thing is, if what we're worried about is lurkers/general public reading threads like this... there really was an opportunity for education - interpreting body language, making proper introductions and evaluation of dogs' reactions to other dogs, what environments are/aren't appropriate (dog park vs classes vs playing with 1-2 other dogs), how to redirect fixated behavior, break up fights, etc... and instead it's devolved into this mess.
> 
> It's like teaching abstinence. Doesn't work in practice.


Definitely.


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

Better put that fat dog on a diet, Johnny! What will the judges think?


----------



## parus (Apr 10, 2014)

I'm going to make, "Yeah, well, your dog is fat," my default comeback from now on.


----------



## CptJack (Jun 3, 2012)

parus said:


> I'm going to make, "Yeah, well, your dog is fat," my default comeback from now on.


HOW DARE YOU. She's just fluffy! (She's fat.)


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Crantastic said:


> Better put that fat dog on a diet, Johnny! What will the judges think?


Well Merlin is retired as of last December... From Conformation anyway..... I mean after he takes Veteran Best of Breed at the AKC/Eukanuba National championship to top of all those Best of breed wins he earned, those 30 months ranked in the top 20 in his breed Nationally, what else does he have to prove? 

He could sit on the couch eating cheeseburgers and powdered sugar cookies.... 

But he has been practicing for his next adventure in dock diving and barn hunt. 

Yea he waddles off the dock but since he is fat, he does make a big splash.... It is pretty cool....


----------



## sassafras (Jun 22, 2010)

I think there's a whole class for splash size in dock diving. *nods*


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

On the topic of ALL PIT BULLS EVERYWHERE ARE DA AND SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED NEAR ANY OTHER DOG PERIOD, I can remember reading a really interesting discussion once on a Pit Bull forum where they were talking about how one of the old time Pit Bull fighters would roll up to a fight with a truck full of Pit Bulls who were totally fine with each other. He'd take one dog out, have it go fight in the pit, than when he was done put the dog back in the car with the rest of the dogs andeverything was totally fine. No fighting, nothing. DA is a behavior issue that Pit Bulls are prone to maybe a little more than other dogs, but that's NOT what they were bred for. Atleast not what the original Pit Bull breeders were aiming for it seems. They were bred to be scrappy and feisty, not to be naturally programed to KILL ALL DOGS!!11


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

RCloud said:


> On the topic of ALL PIT BULLS EVERYWHERE ARE DA AND SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED NEAR ANY OTHER DOG PERIOD, I can remember reading a really interesting discussion once on a Pit Bull forum where they were talking about how one of the old time Pit Bull fighters would roll up to a fight with a truck full of Pit Bulls who were totally fine with each other. He'd take one dog out, have it go fight in the pit, than when he was done put the dog back in the car with the rest of the dogs andeverything was totally fine. No fighting, nothing. DA is a behavior issue that Pit Bulls are prone to maybe a little more than other dogs, but that's NOT what they were bred for. Atleast not the original Pit Bull breeders. They were bred to be scrappy and feisty, not to be naturally programed to KILL ALL DOGS!!11


Don't get back on topic now..... We are discussing Merlin's weight issue....


----------



## Eenypup (Mar 21, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Don't get back on topic now..... We are discussing Merlin's weight issue....


He's so hefty! Sometimes when I see his pictures I think for a split second that he's Bennie when she weighed 90 lb! So confusing!


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Don't get back on topic now..... We are discussing Merlin's weight issue....


Maybe he just needs to avoid stripes. Or maybe only vertical stripes. 
Oh, bold colors should help, get him a nice orange or red collar and he will be thinner


----------



## luv mi pets (Feb 5, 2012)

JohnnyBandit said:


> My dog fat.... .




You have to remember the camera adds 10 pounds


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Oh yah. He's what, 150 pounds now?


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

Does anyone know a good doggy shrink? Merlin is going to need a LOT of therapy now that it has been pointed out he is fat..... His self esteem may never recover....


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Poor Merlin. Don't let him binge eat to deal with his depression. He doesn't need to gain another 150.


----------



## JohnnyBandit (Sep 19, 2008)

RCloud said:


> Poor Merlin. Don't let him binge eat to deal with his depression. He doesn't need to gain another 150.


I do not think I can stop him now....

He's done gone crazy eyed......


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I do not think I can stop him now....
> 
> He's done gone crazy eyed......


Look on the bright side. Crazed eyes go good with 5 chins!


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

Don't beat yourself up. You did the RIGHT thing. If you don't have time for her and don't want to crate / rotate it will be better for her with your ex. Pit Bulls are prone to dog aggression. It isn't something you can train / socialize out of them. You can manage them, you could work with her not to be reactive on walks but I wouldn't trust her to never attack another dog again. Being an only dog sounds like an ideal situation for her.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

chimunga said:


> Actually. Yes. That is what reasonable people say. "Oh hey, I like your argument, it makes sense, and you managed change my mind. Thanks for the interesting conversation."


I know I have said that before, haha .


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

RCloud said:


> On the topic of ALL PIT BULLS EVERYWHERE ARE DA AND SHOULD NEVER BE ALLOWED NEAR ANY OTHER DOG PERIOD, I can remember reading a really interesting discussion once on a Pit Bull forum where they were talking about how one of the old time Pit Bull fighters would roll up to a fight with a truck full of Pit Bulls who were totally fine with each other. He'd take one dog out, have it go fight in the pit, than when he was done put the dog back in the car with the rest of the dogs andeverything was totally fine. No fighting, nothing. DA is a behavior issue that Pit Bulls are prone to maybe a little more than other dogs, but that's NOT what they were bred for. Atleast not what the original Pit Bull breeders were aiming for it seems. They were bred to be scrappy and feisty, not to be naturally programed to KILL ALL DOGS!!11


Yes, Charlotte is CLEARLY plotting Maii's demise in your signature picture  (obligatory sarcasm here of course ), now onto the topic of how fat JB'S dog is xD


----------



## Remaru (Mar 16, 2014)

JohnnyBandit said:


> Does anyone know a good doggy shrink? Merlin is going to need a LOT of therapy now that it has been pointed out he is fat..... His self esteem may never recover....


Well it is normal to put on some weight with a baby in the house. You don't get enough sleep, you find yourself eating convenience foods, and forget about your exercise routine....


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

what is a pibble wibbly wobble crowd? it sounds fun.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> The only reason why I am even responding to you is because all the advice you have posted, someone is going to read this (one of those "Joe Blow" owners you speak of) and think they can put their DA dog with their other dog and "make" them get along, and they are going to end up with one or more dead dogs. Dogs are like people, sometimes they just flat out dont like another dog, there is no reason, they just dont get along. Or, they could get along for YEARS and suddenly, they dont anymore, I have seen that too in JRTs, I have seen it in ACDs, GSDs, etc ... DA is NOT breed specific, but if you WANT to pick a "bully" breed that is most likely to develop DA, then I would say probably the game bred PB's have the most probability of developing DA.
> 
> For an example, this is my own experience with two dogs who do not (and still do not) get along, we never found out WHY they suddenly decided they dont like each other:
> 
> ...


Hey i never said anything about leaving dogs together unattended or joe blows. what the hell is joe blows? I said the dog should be trained to a point where it will listen to you in the heat of the moment. (i used the word dominance and hell broke loose) and that pitbulls aren't monsters that need to be isolated. 

So after reading more of what dominance means to the online community i do disagree with it. But dominance to me will always mean what it means in the english language. but i get why this forum is against using the word in conjunction with dog training.


----------



## dagwall (Mar 17, 2011)

You are still making a stretch from the English definition of dominance to your definition of dominance. My dog is fairly well trained but he's also a goofy jerk sometimes. By your definition he's "being dominant" when he's acting like a brat by demand barking, or if he pulls on leash when he gets over stimulated by seeing/smelling a rabbit, chipmunk, fox, or cat on a walk. He's not being dominant because he's a brat and likes to bark when he has the feels, or he's being the hound mix that he is and really wants to chase those critters.

Both of those are strong drives in him and honestly neither of them bother me enough to put the serious amount of work into correcting them that would be required. He's not being dominant he's just being a dog and doing what comes natural. When what he wants to do doesn't fit into what I need him to do I train him to find another way, when I just don't care enough I let him do what he's going to do. He's still a generally well behaved dog who absolutely listens to me when it matters but I also don't feel the need to control every action he takes either.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

dagwall said:


> You are still making a stretch from the English definition of dominance to your definition of dominance. My dog is fairly well trained but he's also a goofy jerk sometimes. By your definition he's "being dominant" when he's acting like a brat by demand barking, or if he pulls on leash when he gets over stimulated by seeing/smelling a rabbit, chipmunk, fox, or cat on a walk. He's not being dominant because he's a brat and likes to bark when he has the feels, or he's being the hound mix that he is and really wants to chase those critters.
> 
> Both of those are strong drives in him and honestly neither of them bother me enough to put the serious amount of work into correcting them that would be required. He's not being dominant he's just being a dog and doing what comes natural. When what he wants to do doesn't fit into what I need him to do I train him to find another way, when I just don't care enough I let him do what he's going to do. He's still a generally well behaved dog who absolutely listens to me when it matters but I also don't feel the need to control every action he takes either.


I don't see a problem with that. being able to control your dog when you need to is the goal. the same as with your children or any other sentient being you are in charge of. If they do what they are told when you are serious then you are dominant. a dog that never gets to be a dog would be a sad thing. also i suspect an impossible thing.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Byakuzo said:


> Hey i never said anything about leaving dogs together unattended or joe blows. what the hell is joe blows? I said the dog should be trained to a point where it will listen to you in the heat of the moment. (i used the word dominance and hell broke loose) and that pitbulls aren't monsters that need to be isolated.
> 
> So after reading more of what dominance means to the online community i do disagree with it. But dominance to me will always mean what it means in the english language. but i get why this forum is against using the word in conjunction with dog training.


Because you used the word dominance in terms of the relationship between dogs and humans, to which there IS no struggle for dominance, we have the opposable thumbs, the larger brains, we control all the things the dog needs and wants in life, so therefore, we are dominant by default. 

Is there dominance between other dogs? Yes, there can be. But domestic dog pack structure (if you can even call it that) is not the same thing as wolves, studies on feral dogs have shown that they have a lot looser pack structure than wolves, with members leaving and joining the pack all the time.

Look, I get it, I used to think like you, but I have since crossed over to the side of reason that dogs are not trying to "one up" us at every turn. When it comes to their relationships with humans, there is no dominant and submissive, there is trained and untrained. Dogs do bad behaviors because they dont know any better or weren't taught any better, but because they want to run the show.

Also, on the subject that dogs are "retarded wolves", about 20,000 years of evolution separate the dog from the wolf, so they are hardly even the same species anymore, much like apes and humans. Looking at a wolf pack as a reference to train your dog is kind of like saying that you need tips on parenting, so lets see how the chimps do it.


----------



## BigLittle (May 28, 2014)

Your use of "Dominance" will only keep bringing you and others problems. Even though you really have the best of intentions, "Positive, loving authority" will not be the first thing they think. It will be "Overzealous use of force and exercise to make a rebellious animal submit." Every. Time. It's a poisoned word.

Take this word for instance: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/niggardly
I won't actually say it here because it is on the fast track to being roped in by a similar-sounding racial slur against people with dark skin...some on this forum could reasonably take offense to it being thrown around. All it means is frugal or penny-pincher...nothing racist about that. But just hop on to Urban Dictionary and you will see how poisoned that word is becoming. Whether or not the dictionary says so is irrelevant. It's the culture that dictates what a word means, not some old book.

So please, even though most of us know what you're saying when you use "dominance" now, stop using that word because you're just causing yourself problems that shouldn't even exist. Use another word, please.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

BigLittle said:


> Your use of "Dominance" will only keep bringing you and others problems. Even though you really have the best of intentions, "Positive, loving authority" will not be the first thing they think. It will be "Overzealous use of force and exercise to make a rebellious animal submit." Every. Time. It's a poisoned word.
> 
> Take this word for instance: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/niggardly
> I won't actually say it here because it is on the fast track to being roped in by a similar-sounding racial slur against people with dark skin...some on this forum could reasonably take offense to it being thrown around. All it means is frugal or penny-pincher...nothing racist about that. But just hop on to Urban Dictionary and you will see how poisoned that word is becoming. Whether or not the dictionary says so is irrelevant. It's the culture that dictates what a word means, not some old book.
> ...


Yep, use the "D" word in the dog world and watch people go magic bananas.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

I think, to me, the argument of all bullies should be presumed DA and kept away from other dogs at all times is kind of like saying someone WILL commit murder because one of their parents did. So you'd better prevent them from interacting with other people because you never know, and they don't NEED to interact with other people anyway.

Yes, genetics play a role and you can't deny that, but everyone is also an individual and won't ALWAYS follow the path their parents did just because of their DNA.


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

ireth0 said:


> I think, to me, the argument of all bullies should be presumed DA and kept away from other dogs at all times is kind of like saying someone WILL commit murder because one of their parents did. So you'd better prevent them from interacting with other people because you never know, and they don't NEED to interact with other people anyway.
> 
> Yes, genetics play a role and you can't deny that, but everyone is also an individual and won't ALWAYS follow the path their parents did just because of their DNA.


Apples to oranges comparison here.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

Spicy1_VV said:


> Apples to oranges comparison here.


Obviously dogs are not humans and vice versa?


----------



## Spicy1_VV (Jun 1, 2007)

I don't agree they should all be isolated away from other dogs. But saying that they have a higher propensity for DA / fighting isn't anything like saying a human will kill just because a parent did. 

Humans kill for a number of reasons under a number of different circumstances. It is completely different than dogs killing one another. 

There are different reasons/types of DA but when we are talking about the APBT we are talking about fight drive seen as a willingness or desire to fight (modified prey drive I believe). This isn't something you see in most dog breeds. It is also not DA itself that's solely the issue it is fighting style. Any dog of any breed can end up in a fight Even if they are dog friendly. This of course includes APBTs but they are likely to fight different than many breeds so it is important to be aware of. You might note similar to Terriers with prey. Some breeds are noted to having high prey drive. Not all will within those breeds but it's very likely and you can control your dog, just the same with DA. What you stated though would be the equivalent of saying presuming a prey driven breed will have high prey drive is like saying a human who has a parent who hunts will also enjoy hunting. It doesn't make sense. 

Humans are not bred for specific traits dogs are. You did say genetics play a role but it is much different in people compared to animals. Dogs are bred for consistency in traits so genetics is a much more important consideration. Humans are not being bred for controlled traits / killing but Pit Bulls have been bred for dog fighting for over 100yrs.

I do agree that they don't all need to be isolated just not with the human comparison.


----------



## ireth0 (Feb 11, 2013)

I was referring to the viewpoint that bullies should never interact with other dogs, per Trek's claims.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

JohnnyBandit said:


> I do not think I can stop him now....
> 
> He's done gone crazy eyed......


My, what big teeth you have, Mr. Overweight, depressed, Retarded wolf!


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

OwnedbyACDs said:


> Because you used the word dominance in terms of the relationship between dogs and humans, to which there IS no struggle for dominance, we have the opposable thumbs, the larger brains, we control all the things the dog needs and wants in life, so therefore, we are dominant by default.
> 
> Is there dominance between other dogs? Yes, there can be. But domestic dog pack structure (if you can even call it that) is not the same thing as wolves, studies on feral dogs have shown that they have a lot looser pack structure than wolves, with members leaving and joining the pack all the time.
> 
> ...





BigLittle said:


> Your use of "Dominance" will only keep bringing you and others problems. Even though you really have the best of intentions, "Positive, loving authority" will not be the first thing they think. It will be "Overzealous use of force and exercise to make a rebellious animal submit." Every. Time. It's a poisoned word.
> 
> Take this word for instance: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/niggardly
> I won't actually say it here because it is on the fast track to being roped in by a similar-sounding racial slur against people with dark skin...some on this forum could reasonably take offense to it being thrown around. All it means is frugal or penny-pincher...nothing racist about that. But just hop on to Urban Dictionary and you will see how poisoned that word is becoming. Whether or not the dictionary says so is irrelevant. It's the culture that dictates what a word means, not some old book.
> ...


alrighty then ill stay away from the D. form now on when i give advice i will tell people they need to use awhip... (Attention, Walkies, Hugs, Interactive Play.) come to think of it that could come across wrong too. :/


----------



## Crantastic (Feb 3, 2010)

I find that when you're giving advice to random people on the Internet, it helps to just be clear. Don't assume that they understand exactly what training terms mean, and don't use acronyms. Just explain as simply as possible how they can fix their problem.


----------



## RCloud (Feb 25, 2011)

Dogs are capable of some level of dominance, but it's a far cry from what has been traditionally believed. Ma'ii can be a huge bully towards Charlotte sometimes and a straight up brat if she has something he wants or is sitting someplace he wants to sit, doing something he doesn't like, etc. and in most cases, (unless it's a toy) she just does what he wants, because to her she doesn't care enough for it to be worth the confrontation with him. It's not a pack mentality or hierarchy thing though. It's Ma'ii simply being a bossy jerk.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

Crantastic said:


> I find that when you're giving advice to random people on the Internet, it helps to just be clear. Don't assume that they understand exactly what training terms mean, and don't use acronyms. Just explain as simply as possible how they can fix their problem.


don't worry the acronym was just my idea of a joke.


----------



## MastiffGuy (Mar 23, 2015)

Byakuzo may I asked what breeds you have/ have had and or deal with a lot?

Personally I don't agree with your thought on the matter, but everyone has there opinion. 
I don't see dominance as anything but a good way to end up with fear aggression, which is my opinion.

The OP is not giving the dog to a unsuspecting family, it's her ex who knows the issues and the dog, where it can be in a sole dog household.
Confidence in dealing with a dog goes a long way, and currently she does not have that and does feel there maybe a threat to the life of another dog.
Personally don't see where the issue in this is.


----------



## Byakuzo (Mar 19, 2015)

MastiffGuy said:


> Byakuzo may I asked what breeds you have/ have had and or deal with a lot?
> 
> Personally I don't agree with your thought on the matter, but everyone has there opinion.
> I don't see dominance as anything but a good way to end up with fear aggression, which is my opinion.
> ...


staffy x rhodesian (i was very young) lou lou
2 yorkies jamie and benji
jack russel alfie
2 labrador buddy and opie
bichon frise arura
german shepherd x husky x patterdale bowie

This is in regards to my thoughts on pitbulls not being isolated. There can be fighters from any breed. i accept that some are more likely to use violence as their first response but i am also sure this can be trained away in time. one of the yorkies was killed by an offleash newfoundland some of my family holds it against the whole breed. i choose not to think that way. my jack russel like swimming more than my lab. 

i know the op isn't giving the dog away to a random stranger but the op did seem to blame the ex for the dogs socialisation...


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

Some dogs are just selective or DA, it doesnt matter how much socialization they get, they will never be good socially. I have a dog like this, I tried to work hard and socialize her, but she is just socially inept LOL and so I have to be very careful about the dogs she interacts with, because she takes it personally when she does something inappropriate and the other dog corrects her for it.


----------



## dcguthrie7 (May 18, 2015)

Byakuzo said:


> staffy x rhodesian (i was very young) lou lou
> 2 yorkies jamie and benji
> jack russel alfie
> 2 labrador buddy and opie
> ...


Since my ex had sole custody for her first 3 years, yes I blame him. He left her in a backyard 90% of the time, never took her out or anything.


----------



## dcguthrie7 (May 18, 2015)

Anyway, Delilah is doing well with my ex in her new house. My other dogs are also doing surprisingly well (I thought they may be a little sad), I think this was def the best decision for them both.


----------



## pawsaddict (Apr 17, 2013)

Glad everything worked out well. You definitely made the right decision, as hard as it was.


----------



## OwnedbyACDs (Jun 22, 2013)

dcguthrie7 said:


> Anyway, Delilah is doing well with my ex in her new house. My other dogs are also doing surprisingly well (I thought they may be a little sad), I think this was def the best decision for them both.


That's great, I know you are sad, but it sounds like to me that you did the right thing for both dogs


----------



## TheDarkestMinds (Feb 28, 2015)

Glad everything worked out! Despite all the drama in this thread.


----------

