# Can the APBT become a pack member



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

I was on another forum and had a discussion with them on this topic can the apbt in it's true form become part of a pack and survive in the wild?


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

I guess that depends on if they are DA or not..LOL
I don't know if they could REVERT back to the wild but maybe if they were raised in a pack environment, possibly.
It's hard to say with a domesticated animal, although I do know that cats and pigs can revert back to the wild. I have heard that pigs will even grow tusks and hair just like a wild pig.
I dunno,:goodpost:


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

But even if they were raised in the wild alot of pits start showing DA after 9 months up to 2yrs


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

That is true, Rocky started showing DA at about 8 months.
However, I must say that they are not really "Whole" unless they are part of a pack so its a very good possibility that they could.


----------



## smokey_joe (Oct 14, 2005)

I don't think so. One of them would eventually kill the rest of the pack. They may eventually cross breed into a "pit type dog" that could survive in a pack due to survival of the fittest, but that wouldn't be an APBT in its true form.


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

Thats exactly what i was thinking and i blame the so called ol dog men who people make out to be better then these so called gang members of today they where just organized but still inhumane or going against NATURE or GOD for recreation "wreck-creation"


----------



## OldFortKennels (Mar 10, 2006)

I think they could and would. I think nature is the strongest "gene" out there and when it comes to survival I think the dogs would adapt. It would be survival of the fittest to a "T". The dogs that didn't get along with the pack would die and those genes would get weeded out. Only the strong survive, and being "strong" isn't always being the tough one but often the smart one!


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

bkwil said:


> Thats exactly what i was thinking and i blame the so called ol dog men who people make out to be better then these so called gang members of today they where just organized but still inhumane or going against NATURE or GOD for recreation "wreck-creation"


Well, let's not forget the fact that none of us would have the APBT if it wasn't for the old dogmen. The sport did create the dog.

I don't believe that pit bulls in their "true form" could succesfully form a pack because it would require submission. To me the APBT is one of the most intelligent dogs ever created but on the other hand I have to question the intelligence of a dog that does not have the sense to save his own life. One of the keys to survival is avoiding injury or death and that is the opposite of the APBT's nature. Now, maybe dogs not game bred, cold dogs, and curs could pull it off. Eventually, nature would take over and through natural selection the dogs not suited for pack life would be weeded out. But then they would only be another strain of "pit bull" type dogs. Man, the coyotes would have a hard way to go! LOL


----------



## kmhutch (Sep 3, 2007)

I think they can and they would. I know people who use pitbulls in packs to hunt wild hogs and thats no different. I dont think we give them enough credit. I dont think there would be a dog free for all where its every pit for themselves. Because even dogs that aren't DA will be protective against aggressive dogs that come around their yard mates.


----------



## Patch O' Pits (Aug 3, 2007)

OldFortKennels said:


> I think they could and would. I think nature is the strongest "gene" out there and when it comes to survival I think the dogs would adapt. It would be survival of the fittest to a "T". The dogs that didn't get along with the pack would die and those genes would get weeded out. Only the strong survive, and being "strong" isn't always being the tough one but often the smart one!


 I Agree with that


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

Patch O' Pits said:


> I Agree with that


I agree as well, regardless of there breed they are wolves first and foremost, intelligent ones at that I think the pack mentality over time would become their survival tool. All animals strive to live and the smartest ones learn the best way to do so. So I guess you cold say they would adapt..:goodpost:


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

Ok what OFK said is true but with no doctors to fix up there wounds i don'[t think they would make it long after a fight now if they happen to mix in with another type of dog they maybe but then it wouldn't be a true APBT...

and BUZHUNTER no one said we didn't love the breed for what it is now it's just a general debate type question


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

bkwil said:


> and BUZHUNTER no one said we didn't love the breed for what it is now it's just a general debate type question


No, but you did say that "i blame the so called ol dog men who people make out to be better then these so called gang members of today they where just organized but still inhumane or going against NATURE or GOD for recreation "wreck-creation". That is not a "debate-type question". It is the statement I was referring to. So, what exactly are you blaming them for?


----------



## smokey_joe (Oct 14, 2005)

I think he's blaming them for the DA.


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

For exactly what i said going against NATURE being INHUMANE you don't agree you think dogs or any animal should be fighting for our amusement when in NATURE they wouldn't....I don't know if you read or are familiar with the bible but an intresting thing came to me when GOD created all the animals of the world he "saw that they were good" but when it came to man he didn't say that...He gave us domain over them and mankind always try to improve what GOD made GOOD


----------



## smokey_joe (Oct 14, 2005)

bkwil said:


> For exactly what i said going against NATURE being INHUMANE you don't agree you think dogs or any animal should be fighting for our amusement when in NATURE they wouldn't....I don't know if you read or are familiar with the bible but an intresting thing came to me when GOD created all the animals of the world he "saw that they were good" but when it came to man he didn't say that...He gave us domain over them and mankind always try to improve what GOD made GOOD


I see what you're saying. I love my dogs very much and I love APBTs. But, I'll never condone dog fighting even in the days of old. If you own an APBT, you just have to know their history and know that's part of the animals we love. But, that doesn't mean you have to agree with it.


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

Smokey i like u your level headed alot of apbt owners are so defensive...


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

I asked you first. lol. What are you blaming the dogmen for?


----------



## smokey_joe (Oct 14, 2005)

bkwil said:


> Smokey i like u your level headed alot of apbt owners are so defensive...


Gee thanks, I'm blushing a wee bit. :hammer:


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

BUZ i answered you

"For exactly what i said going against NATURE being INHUMANE you don't agree you think dogs or any animal should be fighting for our amusement when in NATURE they wouldn't....I don't know if you read or are familiar with the bible but an intresting thing came to me when GOD created all the animals of the world he "saw that they were good" but when it came to man he didn't say that...He gave us domain over them and mankind always try to improve what GOD made GOOD"


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

So, you are blaming the dogmen for creating a dog that goes against nature?
IMO, all dogs go against nature, if you want to get technical. But if this is your point, then it brings me back to my original point: if it was not for the dogmen breeding dogs for gameness, we would not have the APBT at all. Working dogs are created out of necessity, however terrible that necessity may be in some opinions.


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

Can you explain what you mean all dogs go against nature...working dogs are created for necessity WORK...fighting in the pit is not WORK it's amusement for MANKIND ... pulling a farmers cart,gaurding a home live stock, catching or helping to hunt, searching to rescue thats WORK.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Every breed of dog was created by humans through the process of selective breeding. Nothing natural about that. In nature the breeding rights are earned (in the canine world at least) by the most dominant pair. It is not decided by human desire. 

"Working" dogs to me are any dog created to do a job. That would include making money or building a reputation for a dogman.


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

ok but nature let the wolf know that if they hung around humans they can get free scraps of food and nature let human's know that they can use the wolf to help protect and hunt


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

That's true.


----------



## SouthKakBully (Jul 23, 2007)

APBT are intelligent dogs, but I doubt they would be able to survive in the wild. They've been domesticated for over a century. And using APBT as catch dogs to hunt wild hogs is completely from surviving in the wild. They have been dependent on humans for too long. I don't think APBTs can be pack animals unless it's one male and the rest are females, because the males are going to fight constantly. The only domesticated breeds I think that would be able to survive are breeds like huskies and malamutes, because they're the closest thing to the wolf and still have a lot a survival instincts.


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

I think folks tend to forget that a dog is an animal, domesticated or not.
They are dependent on us but they will always have their animal instinct.
Even living with humans they still live with a pack mentality which is the very
center of their being.


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

ERIC they do have a pack mentality but the apbt was specificly bred to go against that mentality and fight to the death


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

That is true but who's to say the new gene pool couldn't start with one male.
Not all male APBT's would kill all the females and then it goes back to my first statement, male pups raised in a pack environment may be submissive, not all game dogs throw an entire litter of game pups. See what I'm saying??


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

I feel you but like i said on the other forum we need to contact animal planet and get a show like the meeker manor or the monkey one they have on now for the apbt to see what would happen...and we must remeber that one bit could in kill a dog in the long run without HUMAN intervention so even though they may not be game that one bite could kill a game dog


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

That would be kind of like Jerry Springers "Too hot for TV" lol


----------



## geisthexe (Jan 18, 2007)

Ok I have read everyone’s info on here so here the Madam Deb telling you ALL ROLMAO J/K 

I believe APBT, SBT, PRESA any breed that was designed for fighting or taught to become a fighting dog in it past can & will become apart of a pack for the fact of survival. Just like with any wild animal out there, they have a pack order and some fight to try to get it and win or loose against the one that is there now. Usually in the wild it is taught who the pack elder is and dog or other animals bide by it. 

Someone on here said we must remember APBT are Animals this is so true in our world as so many folks believe they are turning there dogs into family members and talk to them as if they are a child. They could be so far wrong. In your own homes dogs make a pack order while you are the leader, they still have that natural order. 

In your own home there is a pack order and if that dog (not matter which breeds) wanted to become the pack leader they can & will challenge you. 

You see in everyday life of dogs that get loose, live on the streets so on .. learn to survive and some join packs and other challenge packs. We see this everyday. We also see it in our local animal shelters due to them putting more then 3 dogs in a pen, again they are making a pack or should say bond at that point.

JMT

Deb


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

deb I feel and understand what your saying but a dog that was taught to fight and not give up how could they form a pack when in one fight they could be hurt even if they did win they wouldn't be able to hunt i'm not talking about being lose around human territory where they can scavange for food i'm talking about in the jungle where they would be eaten by a lion or wolf you understand what i'm trying to say and as for the pressa i know a lady who rescued one from the katrina hurrican who was found walking in a pack of dogs she is the owner of alaskanmalmutes.com the lady who comes out to just about every weight pull and makes/sell's harness's


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

I don't think it's a fair comparison using behavior in the box and behavior in the wild as if they go hand in hand.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Wow, this has become a really interesting thread and even remained civilized. lol I like it. I'll add that the original question was about the APBT in it's "true form". Now, to me the "true form" of the APBT would be the best examples of the intended form. This would be very game dogs. I don't beleive that they would have time to even become hungry before their human designed character would kick in. I'd give it maybe 3 seconds before the most DA dogs would start it and maybe 3 hours before the strongest dog was the only one standing.Or probably dying. 

Like I said before, Maybe less than perfect specimens may survive to the point of cooperation but is that really a pit bull in it's true form? I would say that even dogs off of GRCH game dogs that turned out to be curs would not be pit bulls in their true form...


----------



## geisthexe (Jan 18, 2007)

bkwil said:


> deb I feel and understand what your saying but a dog that was taught to fight and not give up how could they form a pack when in one fight they could be hurt even if they did win they wouldn't be able to hunt i'm not talking about being lose around human territory where they can scavange for food i'm talking about in the jungle where they would be eaten by a lion or wolf you understand what i'm trying to say and as for the pressa i know a lady who rescued one from the katrina hurrican who was found walking in a pack of dogs she is the owner of alaskanmalmutes.com the lady who comes out to just about every weight pull and makes/sell's harness's


I will say this if a dog that is domestic and has fought before can and will get itself into pack if it does not know its environment do to pure fear. It will also know it is better to run with a pack, then do to what you say be attacked by something else.

All animals in the wild, if hurt and unable to provide for itself and the pack are band from a pack anyway and left for dead.

Alaskanmalmutes.com no such website 
If you are speaking about missy from Alaskan Dream Dog Equipment Alaskandream.org No she has never had a Presa.. I am friend with her personally and has never spoke of any Presa's. But when she is back from being out of town I will be happy to ask her about it.

Deb


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

Ok, so we all know that the APBT is capable of breeding without killing each other, otherwise we would not be here speaking of this.

So now I have a question, Hypothetically speaking would a APBT in its true form still fight with his son to the death even though he's a cur and has no desire to fight back? (Stay with me, I'm going somewhere with this.) LOL


----------



## gamecock10 (Nov 26, 2006)

"the APBT is capable of breeding without killing each other"

Breeding stands help a lot!


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Actually, relation has no meaning to to most dogs, I had to remove my girl from her own pup when it was only 3 months old. Another thing I have noticed about truly DA dogs is that they seem to be more excited by an opponent who tries to submit. Maybe that's a natural reaction to weakness and and effort to eliminate it? Who knows but I do know that of a dog is truly DA, submission will not stop the attack. Some pits have to be muzzled in order to breed. I read a story some time ago (who knows if it's true or not) about a dog who had to be repeatedly choked off the bitch while they were trying to breed them. He was apparently more interested in fighting than breeding.lol


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

Is this true of every "game" dog?
Is it not at all possible to have a successful breeding without human intervention?


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

I doubt it's the case with every one. Not all game dogs are DA. Hell, I've even seen males that had to have help putting it in. LOL


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

LOL, So now we can say that if it happens it's purely by chance.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

I would say that as far as breeding goes without human intervention it would all depend on the dogs. Some are cool, some are not.


----------



## smokey_joe (Oct 14, 2005)

There seems to be a lot of "accidental breedings" between otherwise DA dogs. I guess it just depends on the dog and what it wants at the moment!!!


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

So now why is it so impossible to conceive that it could happen in a or as a beginning of a pack. Then the under age offspring whom have not turned breed with that same male. Sure most of them may not survive but it is feasible. Not only that, every time they multiply the DA is slowly going to be weeded out of the gene pool just like any human intervention could do.
So I guess you could look at it like it's possible they could begin in their true form but with every generation they would become less and less "Game".
Thus not ending up a true APBT.


----------



## smokey_joe (Oct 14, 2005)

ericschevy said:


> So now why is it so impossible to conceive that it could happen in a or as a beginning of a pack.


That's a very good point. Maybe if nature overrules DA when it comes to breeding, nature would also trump DA when it comes to survival.

I just don't think DA dogs could live together in the mundane day to day in harmony. Even dogs that are otherwise submissive and very tolerant of others will fight if there is no other option. And without human intervention, both dogs would probably die.

I think it's possible they could survive in the wild, just not in a conventional pack. They'd mostly be loners only coming together to breed or raise young. Then, when the young are weened, the momma dog would kick them out on their own.

If there was a pack, I'd say the female would be alpha. It's been my experience that males submit to females. But, that's just my .02.

I also think that over time there would be no "pure breeds" left in the wild. Dogs don't descriminate when it comes to breeding. Left on their own in the wild, all dogs over time would just be mixes. So, no one breed would survive in its "original form."


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

DEB that's who i meant and she does or did have a pressa i was in delaware with her back in october and i seen her pull the dog i asked about it and she told me the story how it was found running with a pack of dogs after the katrina hurrican....

ERIC i think that's what would happen to...but now would the apbt still be the best dog or try the hardest at everything it does


----------



## OUTLAW (Nov 3, 2006)

Of course they can. A couple years back here in Chicago we had a pack of pitbulls loose in a forest preserve only 2 blocks from my house.


----------



## smokey_joe (Oct 14, 2005)

OUTLAW said:


> Of course they can. A couple years back here in Chicago we had a pack of pitbulls loose in a forest preserve only 2 blocks from my house.


Well, maybe I'm wrong. (First time for everything.) LOL just kidding.

Do you have any links on this? I'd like to read about it sounds pretty cool.


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

Me to i want read up on this and do you know if they were pure or pit mixes


----------



## OUTLAW (Nov 3, 2006)

bkwil said:


> Me to i want read up on this and do you know if they were pure or pit mixes


I wish I did. But I'll try looking it up.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

smokey_joe said:


> Well, maybe I'm wrong.


Not necessarily. Remember the question was about pits in their "true form". It's possible that none of the dogs were even pits at all for that matter. We all know how the media generalizes.


----------



## smokey_joe (Oct 14, 2005)

buzhunter said:


> Not necessarily. Remember the question was about pits in their "true form". It's possible that none of the dogs were even pits at all for that matter. We all know how the media generalizes.


This is true.


----------



## MY MIKADO (Apr 7, 2006)

Okay I have read though the lot of this thread and I think that YES APBT in their true forum could be a pack. Why because they would be so busy trying to survive they would not be fighting. If food is not readily available and they are running to catch a deer or rabbit or whatever they are not going to stop and fight no matter how DA they are. And as for breeding I think that they would figure it out. Humans are really great in jumping in and HELPING if animals are left on their own they are so much smarter than we are.


I just wanted to say how proud I am that this thread didn't get all hot under the collar. It is a good discussion.


----------



## geisthexe (Jan 18, 2007)

MY MIKADO said:


> Okay I have read though the lot of this thread and I think that YES APBT in their true forum could be a pack. Why because they would be so busy trying to survive they would not be fighting. If food is not readily available and they are running to catch a deer or rabbit or whatever they are not going to stop and fight no matter how DA they are. And as for breeding I think that they would figure it out. Humans are really great in jumping in and HELPING if animals are left on their own they are so much smarter than we are.
> 
> I just wanted to say how proud I am that this thread didn't get all hot under the collar. It is a good discussion.


I could not agree with you more about the dogs. And about the discussion

Deb


----------



## MY MIKADO (Apr 7, 2006)

Thank you Deb I think that is the first time we have ever agreed on anything. COOL!!!


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

MIKADO your right i think on this forum we have adult minded people that can have a friendly educated discussion and use sound right reasoning...I alot of peopl get mad saying that the apbt is a smart dog and i need to give it credit when i never said that the apbt wasn't smart...i say that are one of if not the smartest breeds around jmo but if they could survive in the wild in a pack they would be the GREATEST hunters because not only do they have speed but agility and strenght i feel sorry for the great black bear if you have 6 pits attacking it :snap: hey lets get crazy and say in america those mountain lion's might even be in trouble


----------



## bkwil (Sep 7, 2007)

I got this from TEXPIT but pay attention to #3,4,6

Animal Behavior by Lee Robinson 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Breeds don't define the behavioral terms. They display the behaviors. The focus of this article is behavior, not breeds. 

The degree to which a dog displays a behavior may be influenced by the breed and dog...but never the less...the terms themselves are unified for all breeds...as they don't define breeds, but behaviors. 

First, lets define drive. A drive is a behavior that is motivated or displayed in order to preserve a species. Sex drive for example is the desire to procreate..., which preserves the species. 

Behaviors include... 

1. Prey drive - The desire to chase, hunt, catch kill...for food. What some people call "play drive" when a dog chases a ball is actually prey drive even though the ball is not food. It is the instinctive response to catch (and typically bite) the object. This drive supplies food, which is obviously a necessary component of life and therefore prey drive, as do all drives...preserves the species. The perfect example is the cat and mouse...or dog and rabbit. 

2. Defense drive - The natural reaction to defend against a threat, preserved threat, or challenge...to protect themselves, others, or what they possess. Defense has many degrees. There are courageous defenders that are forward. There are fear biters that would opt for flight if given the chance...leading to the phrase "fight or flight" that often pops up when discussing defense drives. The perfect example of defense is a coyote or wolf protecting its den from a bear. If the coyote is courageous (perhaps motivated in this example by protecting it den with young pups in it...so it views the need to protect as worth the risk of courage in this case)...the coyote or wolf may actually pursue the bear until the bear is a safe distance from the den. If the wolf is not courageous (or feels the den isn't important...no pups), the wolf may leave...or "cur" to choose flight...realizing that success may come at too big a cost for little gain. This behavior is species preserving and is therefore defined as a drive. There are also other aspects of defense such as rank drive, which is about protecting one's position or rank (by being combined often with other desires such as sex drive or other benefits of status). Because rank is different in some ways that many of the other aspects of defense I believe it should be defined totally separately from defense...as rank isn't "true defense" although it is a form of defense and therefore has some things in common with defense. More on that later. 

3. "Fight drive" - I put in quotes because true fight drive doesn't exist in a natural world. Very few people truly understand what real "fight drive" is. Fight drive is only found among a few domesticated animals that have been selected to fight. In the natural world, fighting an unnecessary battle causes extinction...or death. Therefore, by definition of the term fight drive, it can't be labeled as a "natural drive" in that it isn't a behavior motivated to preserve the species. HOWEVER, in the domesticated world...in certain populations (such as game fighting dogs), if a dog quit then was not permitted to breed. Only the ones that would win were allowed to breed...and over time (with the help of using medicine to preserve winning dogs that would have otherwise died)...the dogs got "gamer" and "gamer" until "game dogs" began displaying a behavior that would cause their own extinction if it wasn't for the aid of man and medicine. These dogs we saved and admired...and bred. So, what was unnatural developed into a "species preserving behavior in an UNNATURAL and DOMESTICATED WORLD...hence "artificial selection" creating "an artificial drive" known as "fight drive." 

4. Rank drive - is simply trying to obtain dominance. I have studied and observed two forms of Rank drive. Intraspecies rank and interspecies rank. 

A. Intraspecies rank drive is normal rank drive behavior, which is the desire to move UP WITHIN THE PACK for things like breeding rights, first at food, etc...(Intra-species rank has nothing to do with humans). It is a desire to obtain dominance ONLY within the given species and not directed towards other species. Some degree of intraspecies rank is to be expected among all social animals. 

B. Interspecies rank is when rank drive/dominance crosses the species barrier (and is directed towards humans)...and is not normal in most animals and even in many breeds of dogs, but has been selected for in SOME lines of dogs (such as the GSD, Rottie, Mal, Chow Chow, Sharpea, and others). It is BASICALLY defined as dominance towards humans or other non-canine animals...and is often linked to what is known as social aggression. Although many traditionalists desire a degree of interspecies rank or social aggression among police and military types of service dogs, it is my believe that interspecies rank is unacceptable for a family companion guardian type of dog. 

5. Cur - this is not a drive. This is a behavior. It describes and animal that quits as a result of realizing success isn't likely. This is both a positive and a negative. In the natural world...in nature it promotes survival...which is good. A natural world a canine shouldn't fight a loosing battle, not if it wants to live and reproduce. For some types of domesticated dogs though this is not desirable. Fighting dogs, protection dogs, and even tracking dogs have been selected to not quit their job...and for these groups a "cur" is not desired. A rank driven dog will often cur when it sees it can't dominate, therefore a term developed known as "rank cur" came about when a dog would bluff or even start rough, but that would quickly realize it wasn't going to dominate their opponent and then quit rather decisively. 

6. Game - this is not a drive. This is a descriptive term that is often used to refer to a dog that won't quit and that always sees himself as winning or succeeding...no matter how bad they get. 

7. Courage - Is not a drive, but is a measure of confidence and in some cases overlaps to stability and nerve. 

8. Stability - This is not a drive, but is a measure of "clear headedness." A stable dog does not flip flop or redirect with inappropriate behaviors regardless of stress. Although redirecting behaviors are expressed in response to stress...A stable dog may have strong nerve, but does not require strong nerve. A weak nerved dog could also be stable by simply shutting down. To help clarify this unique behavior, let's refer to many game dogs for examples. It is known many game dogs will not bite a person even in a heated fight even under stress in that "driven" environment. These dogs will often remain focused on their opponent regardless of the stress (not redirecting = stability) yet the same dog may shut down when taken into a noisy busy shopping area or traffic (expressing stress = weak nerve). Although nerve and stability are connected, they are not the same. 

9. Nerve - This is not a drive. Nerve relates to a behavioral expression of stress. A strong-nerved dog is a dog that isn't easily stressed. A weak nerved dog is a dog that is easily stressed. 

10. Threshold - This is not a drive. If there is any aspect of animal terminology that is often misunderstood...this would be one such term. A threshold refers to the amount of stimuli required to elicit a change in behavior. In other words, a threshold is what is needed to cause a new response by stimulating it. A clear example would be a stimulus strong enough to the illicit the "fight" option of defense drive...but not so strong to cause flight. A threat presents itself and the dog/animal responds by showing a change in behavior (aggression). Then there are ALSO thresholds that cap that behavior by again causing a new response. Take the same example of defense, but now say the heat of the threat gets turned up and causes the dog/animal to change from the fight option to the flight response. By ending the fight option and started a new behavior we capped the fight threshold and just caused the flight response. And now take it further...and say the dog has ran so long that it is exhausted and must lay down...this again is a new stimulus (tired) and therefore caused a new response (laying down/no longer if flight). 

Lee Robinson, M.S. Animal Sciences


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

Great info. 

"the dogs got "gamer" and "gamer" until "game dogs" began displaying a behavior that would cause their own extinction if it wasn't for the aid of man and medicine."

This is what I would consider to be a pit bull in its "true form".

"Cur - this is not a drive. This is a behavior. It describes and animal that quits as a result of realizing success isn't likely. This is both a positive and a negative. In the natural world...in nature it promotes survival...which is good."

This would not be "true form" IMO, but would possibly be a good foundation for pack formation. 

And I agree, this is a great discussion. A lot of deep thinking. All of you guys are interesting to chat with.


----------



## ericschevy (Nov 10, 2006)

OK, We'll call it a draw..LOL


----------



## chino0503 (Jan 3, 2008)

imo you cant have 2 alphas together. when me and my buddy were living together we kept our dogs both males on the same yard. mine was a straight DA amstaff and his was a ambully. the thing is the ambully was younger but he was raised around my dog for his whole life, in fact he was the only dog i could bring my amstaff around (he would snap on any dog with a blink of a eye, no warning whatsoever). 

they never had a reason to fight (like leaving toys laying around for them to fight over), we always fed them separately and thats how we kept it. the only thing they would do together is play fetch, the ambully couldnt hang and he never got the ball so he would always give up. they were the best of friends. from my experience, once they fight once... thats it, they're always gonna fight again. even if they dont have a reason to fight at all. 

i keep my gamedog around my brothers ambully (2 females) together all the time... they sleep in the same dog house and the same rules apply to them too, no toys or bones laying around and they get along really well. except one time, my brothers dog growled/cried like i never heard before then tried to rush mine but changed her mind and just ran past her. this happened because i gave my dog a rib and put her in a crate (with diamond, my brothers dog watching her eat the whole time) and soon as i took her out this happened. i learned my lesson.... im never gonna do that again.

this is just with 2 dogs, never more. so i dont know about the pack thing.... so to sum it up, dont leave toys around, dont have them playing with the same toy (like tug of war, this could easily start a fight), feed separately and make sure 1 is dominant and 1 is submissive.


----------



## buzhunter (Sep 3, 2007)

chino0503 said:


> from my experience, once they fight once... thats it, they're always gonna fight again. even if they dont have a reason to fight at all.


Ain't that the truth! Seems like they never forget. A buddy of mine had two crazy bitches that got into it. He seperated them both from then on. One got loose about 6 months later and she headed straight for the other girls kennel, worked the chain link until she got in and killed the other. The guy was in a wheelchair and had no help. No way to get there in time. It was bad. But she was on a mission and she was going to finish the job sooner or later.


----------



## smokey_joe (Oct 14, 2005)

buzhunter said:


> Ain't that the truth! Seems like they never forget. A buddy of mine had two crazy bitches that got into it. He seperated them both from then on. One got loose about 6 months later and she headed straight for the other girls kennel, worked the chain link until she got in and killed the other. The guy was in a wheelchair and had no help. No way to get there in time. It was bad. But she was on a mission and she was going to finish the job sooner or later.


OMG that's horrible. Poor guy. I couldn't imagine knowing that was going on and be helpless to stop it.


----------

