Are SBT's ever calm? General Chat

Um, I'm somewhat befuddled by all the initials...think the topic is staffies though yes? IMHO with any bully, the beginning of a walk is always exciting...INCREDIBLY exciting...your feet might not touch the ground for a few blocks in fact.

But that doesn't mean they're more hyper or nutso than other breeds. They're just very strong pups. My two leave the house at warp speed. But perhaps after three or four blocks they settle into a much more comfortable gait.

@lovemybull - you could be talking about Pereg, although I have the advantage of using wheels and not legs so my feet never do touch the ground! But she definitely needs a fast pace for a gallop until she will walk quietly when I slow down - but she alternates between the gallop and the trot all the time we are out.

She is incredibly strong.

Slightly off topic but, have just re read this thread and realised that we haven't heard from @katygeorge or @fieldy for a while. I hope you and your dogs are OK, ladies.

I thought that Katy had posted recently but I see I was wrong, so I join you @CaroleC in your hope that both they and their dogs are OK.

Hi Carole and Malka.were ok thanks. Had a few issues going on over xmas. Thanks for remembering us! Dogs are all fine and still keeping me on my toes lol.hope everyone and all our furry friends are fit and well

A Staffy cross is a cross. Not a Staffy, this sounds like the same thing we have to put up with in the US with Pit Bull mixes. They are crosses not Pit Bulls, just big mixes.

They are all man made. A pure bred is still man made, they are selectively bred to a breed standard.

Crazy to think that what people try to pass off as Staffy there would be bigger than APBT in 20-30" wow. When most think of APBT being a bit bigger.

People are always ruining breeds by breeding bigger or crossing to get bigger.

I've been headbutted by BOTH the Labby guys I've owned. I've also seen them smash into things headfirst without a flinch. As for Staffies and other bull breeds, I've never met a truly calm one. Met some nice ones, but they were all busybodies.

BTW, I'd rather have a slightly too large pitty than one who has had his ears mutilated. It looks absolutely ridiculous (HATE seeing the dogs with nearly no ears, and it can be used to mask faulted ears in questionable specimens), especially the short or "battle" crops and in most cases these days, serves no purpose. Better leggy or stocky than earless. Far worse things to complain about regarding bull breeds than size.

The thing is they are NOT Pits, they are basically bandog type bred dog. Those dogs very typically have cropped ears as well. Now if you just mean a catch weight Pit sure some people like em but 30" that's not going to happen. They are Pit mixes. With what Great Dane?
We are talking about SBT the size of a Central Asian Shepherd! That's ridiculous.

The ears are completely irrelevant since no matter the size of the dog they can be cropped or natural, same for the genetic make up of a dog.
There are no "faulted ears" since any ear set is acceptable. I don't think ear cropping has ever served much purpose, especially "no ears" which you mostly see on the big dogs too. Some are self jobs by the dumb owners that's why they are super short & jagged. There are very important things to complain about but ears is one of the least important.

A slightly large pitty is not to be confused with a Bandogge, as those are usually in the giant breed area. As for the crops not being important, I disagree. One of the main issues surrounding bull breeds is stereotypical aggression and/or poor ownership. At this point where people can barely tell the difference between the bull breeds, their size isn't important anymore. There is barely a breed standard for some bull breeds anymore.

There's no reason to crop, it's often done by the SAME people who cause so many problems for the dogs, and IMO, it helps to perpetuate stereotypes about the breeds. That they were bred to fight, that they're mean, etc. THAT, IMO is the biggest thing to focus on with these dogs, as bans of these types are spreading wider, and there's really no solid reason for it except the thugs and horrid dog owners that tend to flock to these breeds. WHO CARES if the APBT is to breed standard if all of the "types" get BANNED?

Size, schmize. The APBT is not an AKC recognized breed, they no longer have a TRUE type... and if you have a TRUE type, he usually just gets called anorexic or something.

Here's an APBT I fostered for a while. She was only about 10 months in the pic. She didn't look all "steroidy" or bulky and she was fine the way she was. A colby/chinaman girl, not really any game.... and a great dog. Would hate for dogs like her to get BANNED because everyone thinks all pitties are fighting dogs and vicious.

I'm sorry this might be kind of long.

This was originally about SBT in the UK but the same can apply to the APBT in the US. It wasn't said slightly larger in what I quoted and you replied to my post. It said up to 30" that is getting to giant breed area. My Caucasian Ovcharka was 29"
Central Asian I mentioned in my previous post are generally upper 20s to low 30s. These are considered giant breeds by most.
The bandogs are usually closer to those heights.
A catch weight dog I wouldn't categorize as giant and I conceded that in my last post but that's not what we were talking about. It was also clearly stated that these termed "man made Staffy" were in fact crosses.

That is an issue they do faced. Them and their owners being stereotyped. I agree there.

I can tell the bull breeds apart just fine. Perhaps lay people can't, don't doubt that at all but then many can't tell apart a Flat coat from a Lab or a Lab from a Chessy. They can't tell apart various terriers either.

The size is very much important. A dog bred for conformation should be within an acceptable size. A dog bred for work or dog sports should still be close to typical size give or take. A dog of a given breed should appear recognizable as that breed. Which would include a normal size for said breed.

There either is a breed standard or there isn't. There is no barely. For most bull breeds there is a breed standard. Most all are available online.

Though my post is about APBT not bull breeds in general. It is as well about how the SBT & APBT situation reflect each other in their home countries.

What I was trying to state is ears period are not important. You said crops area used to hide faulty ears but there are no ear faults, so ears are the least important part of the dog.

There are much more important/worse things than both ears or slight size variation like bow legs, weak pasterns, slip hocks, poor temperament and health problems to name a few.

True there isn't a real reason to crop Pits (and many other breeds) other than cosmetic.
It's ironic people associating cropping with fighting when most fighting dogs are likely natural ears and many show dogs cropped.

I believe the people that crop are as widely varied as the people who own the breed overall. So that is a stereotype generalization in itself as saying Pit owners are thugs, dog fighters or drug dealers, ect. Some people causing problems for this breed do crop, others causing problems do not. Likewise good pet owners crop. The vast majority of AKC show dogs are cropped as well and I've been told it's a little hard to finish a natural eared dog of many breeds not just AmStaff. Just the same there are UKC Pits also cropped and of course some being dual registered as AST even more likely to be cropped. I've had a few dogs ears cropped myself. Haven't had any done in a long time and can put that money into something else like health testing, shows, ect.

There isn't a good reason for any BSL. However they are not victim of it because of crops. It is due to irresponsible ownership or ignorant thinking. I'm outside an area where Pits were banned. This is due to a child being killed and the family getting petitions signed and politicians to listen to them and people to agree with them. I feel BSL is often political. It won't matter if people never crop again BSL will continue. Rotts are an uncropped breed but are also banned in certain places. In my previous town they wanted to ban Pits and there were not any real problems with them. There was a large bust over an hour away and they wanted to use BSL as "prevention" for such things.
I sold a pup to a wonderful family, unfortunately their city decided to ban Rottweiler. Then these geniuses wanted to ban Pit Bulls putting them in the same category as Rotts and stating that if they ban Rotts they ban Pits. Which did go through despite the owners going to the meetings and me trying to help best I could.
A Louisiana woman was disfigured by her "Pit Bulls" which then made people push for BSL in which she was stated to be for. These were her own dogs that attacked her. From the sounds of it they were probably NOT even Pits but that's what she identified them as so of course that's what they were recognized as.
There are breed bans against rare breeds that have never caused problems in the city with a basn but hey they "might be dangerous" is the thinking.

Your point is? There are many breeds that are not AKC recognized. The AKC is not the only registering body with breed clubs and standards. The Central Asian Shepherd was only recently accepted into FSS and there are still breeders against it, very much against including one of the most reputable of CAO breeders. All it will do is cause a split in type like accepting the APBT did. As Pit Bulls were in fact registered by the AKC originally in earlier 1900s as Bull Terriers and later in 1935 separately as Staffordshire Terriers. They may used a different name. If they again registered them with a separate gene pool under the name APBT you would simply see another split in type. No different than you see in other breeds such as Border Collies. Some breeders of them are vehemently against AKC. I've never owned or not desired to have an AKC reg dog even with breeds that are AKC recognized.

Their "type" is as true today as it was in generations past. I'm not sure where you are getting that they don't have one. They have varying types again just like other breeds and the more popular the more you will typically see variations (or if it is a non show breed like the CAO where land race dogs are still imported). Labs have a big difference in type because they have different types. It's how you get isolated gene pools within pure breeds. You often have bench type, trial/sport type, working/field type then bybs with a varied type not breeding for anything and in many cases people are not or are seldom inter breeding types for fear of loss of type.

All my dogs are of breed type (imo). They are mostly around 17-18" give or taken, though height isn't too important it's more about the weight which should be balanced with the height. I prefer smaller dogs. The largest I've had (and finished too) was 53lbs conditioned and probably 23" judging from his withers and where they met with my height.

It really doesn't matter what ignorant people refer to my dogs or any other of proper breed type as. That doesn't negate the fact that many dogs of type still exist and that their is a standard. They can call em anorexic all they want.

You also stated cropping is used to hide faulty ears, while this isn't true, there would have to exist a standard to have faults regardless of AKC status.

No one mentioned "steriody" or bulky. A bulky dog sounds more like a Am Bully and some bandogs (they vary) not an APBT. I agree she looks fine, very pretty dog actually. Responsible Pit owners don't want to see them banned for any reason. We all want the freedom to have our dogs.

What a grand post. I wasn't really trying to argue or disagree with you, only mention that I think the B.S.L. and breed misconceptions are the biggest issue to me and crops make it worse. As for a few of the other statements, I just put them out there. I pretty much agree with everything you say, it's not long at all... It's worded well with good detail.

My dogs are just mutts and TBH as long as it's a male, and I can see some Labby or some kind of retriever in him... He's perfect! I guess I've never placed a HUGE emphasis on breed standards because I personally like muttleys. Pit bulls are not always APBT, and the widespread confusion does cause problems of their own.

RARELY will you see an APBT as the dog that mauled a child or elderly person to death. No, that would be a "pit bull" dog... could be a mix of bully breed and something else altogether, even. In the end, there's nothing that can really be done... so many places (even in America) are banning the type... and it doesn't do a lick of good, either.

Slowly, I think given time... America will ban the American Pit Bull Terrier, too... shame.

Thinking about it there seems to be other things the general public views negatively too. Its really interesting the perception of people on "the other side".

One thing about crops (I know some people think it makes them look scary) is that a lot of the general public I've met doesn't seem to really notice. If I have a crop or natural I think they notice my dogs friendly dispositions and that's what disarms them either way. If you are taking a really friendly Pit out in public that goes a long way.

I consider only APBT to be actual Pit Bulls even though people want to lump every remotely bully dog as Pit. That certainly causes confusion as you say. It also causes some of the BSL issues or bite stats. If it's Pit like it's labeled Pit Bull and it damages the APBT.

That's what I've found too with attacks. There are certainly man biters out there but most these "Pit Bull attacks" are either mixes or breed can't be verified. Some are also verified to be other breeds though mis reported as Pits. I find that very frustrating.

I hope it never comes to that, being banned in America I will have to move!

What's "TBH"?

Agree with you again. TBH means, to be honest. Pit bull attacks are pit bull attacks usually, not APBT attacks. Everything is so unfortunately skewered surrounding that breed. It's sad how far they've fallen, ages ago they were respected, now everyone wants to get rid of them. Not EVERYONE, but you get my point.

I'm getting totally confused with this thread which was supposed to be about Staffordshire Bull Terriers but now seems to be a discussion about American Pit Bull Terriers!

APBT's are banned in the UK whereas Staffies are the 5th most popular breed. They're also much smaller than an APBT. A standard sized Staffie is between 13 to 16 inches tall and weighs between 25 to 38lbs .... smaller than my Pei! An APBT is anything between 14 to 24 inches and can weigh up to 78lbs, so considerably larger.

When I was a child my grandfather, a farmer, had two dogs ... a black Lab who'd been trained to the gun and a white Staffie who guarded the farm. I remember Bess the Staffie went missing one evening. The following morning, my grandfather found her in the barn standing guard over a tramp who'd decided to spend the night in there. He told my grandad he hadn't had a wink of sleep because every time he moved Bess growled at him, but never once tried to attack him. I was brought up with her daughter a Staffie x Lab. She was my nanny, my playmate, my best friend and confidante. She'd allow me to do anything with her ... dress her up, take her walks and in summer we regularly slept together in a tent in the garden!

Over the past few months my two have trained with a Staffie, and English Bull Terrier and an Amstaff. If you lined them up together its easy to see which breed they are. I'm just waiting to meet an APBT which are not banned in Hungary and hope when I do I've got my camera with me!

Not meant to be confusing. I'm the one who brought up APBT because
1. The SBT situation in the UK seems to be the same as the APBT situation in US. These are cousin breeds facing the same problems in their home country.

2. People breeding "Staffs" that are 20-30" must really have some nerve claiming these mixes Staffs when they are larger than an APBT which is typically a leggier breed. Though I thought it shocking to read I guess people sell XL Pit mutts as Pits, why wouldn't they do it with Staffs.

Staffs are said to be the 3rd most popular breed in the UK. There isn't probably a way to get a completely accurate figure but they are extremely popular there just as Pits are here.

While they can be larger it isn't true to say SBT are "much smaller" since there is a considerable amount of overlap. I own APBT and I'm also familiar with SBT.
SBT 14-16 24-34lbs / 28-38lbs
APBT 17-20 30-50lbs / 18-21 35-60lbs
Dogs of either either breed can deviate from this. SBT are not uncommon to be 40lbs and pure bred can still be a little larger but even at the given ranges there is overlap. One thing I noticed at a show them being shorter than 2 girls I had (under 35lbs) but heavier carrying more weight on a smaller frame.

Out of 1000s of them I've never seen a 78lbs APBT, this sounds more like a Cane Corso or American Bulldog. The largest I've owned chain weight was about 56lbs and yes he was tall about 23" weight needs to be balanced to height. The rest of my dogs 15-18" 25-42lbs for a rare large anomaly to exist shouldn't be taken as the norm.

Your grandpa SBT sound like a great dog. I hope you get the chance to meet an APBT too.

I wasn't even thinking when I posted earlier but my large Pit was actually a Pitterstaff. Might be important to note. Though he had APBT type for sure.